Religion and Gay Marriage: Reactions to Prop 8 Ruling.

[caption id="attachment_21905" align="aligncenter" width="254" caption="Proposition 8 election map"]<a href="http://queeringthechurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Proposition-8-election-map.png"><img class="size-medium wp-image-21905" title="Proposition 8 election map" src="http://queeringthechurch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Proposition-8-election-map-254x300.png" alt="" width="254" height="300" /></a>[/caption]
<p style="text-align: justify;">Catholic bishops have been quick to react to yesterday's court ruling that California's Proposition 8 ballot was unconstitutional, speaking of their disappointment at what they see as the "injustice" of the ruling (an ironic choice of words, as it is the business of the courts above all, to deliberate and rule on matters of justice.  The learned judges in this case, confirming earlier decisions by lower courts, have found that the "injustice" lay in creating two classes of persons, one with lesser rights than the other). Frances De Bernardo at New Ways / Bondings 2.0, recalling the active role that the bishops played in perpetrating the original injustice, reflects on the harm that has done to the Catholic Church in California, and draws an important lesson from it: the urgent need, going forward, to move from a political stance on the matter to a pastoral one:</p>
&nbsp;
<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>Though this case temporarily provides a victory for the marriage equality movement in California, there is still work of reconciliation work to be done in the Catholic Church there.  In a <a title="‘Catholic Church Doesn’t Need to Take Another Battering’" href="http://newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/catholic-church-doesnt-need-to-take-another-battering/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #000080;">post two weeks ago</span></a>, I mentioned that a California friend told me that the hierarchy’s heavily funded campaign to pass Proposition 8 has had a harmful effect on the pastoral life of LGBT Catholics and their allies in California.  Many have become alienated from the church and left it because of the vociferous anti-gay nature of the campaign and its rhetoric.  While the hierarchy has been focused on the political nature of the marriage debate, it’s time that they started to look at the pastoral component of it, too, and begin the much needed work of reconciliation–for the good of the entire church.</em></span></p>
<p style="text-align: right;"><a href="http://newwaysministryblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/the-catholic-factor-of-proposition-8/">Francis DeBernardo, Bondings 2.0</a></p>
</blockquote>
&nbsp;
<p style="text-align: justify;">Other denominations that were active in the Prop 8 campaign against marriage, have expressed similar and predictable disappointment. I am more interested though, in the mounting evidence of an opposite, supportive view from faith leaders.<!--more--></p>
&nbsp;
<h4 style="text-align: justify;">Religious support <em>in favour</em> of justice and equality in marriage.</h4>
&nbsp;

Last week, an English bishop declared his support for gay marriage in the UK. In Washington DC, an Episcopal bishop has declared similar support for marriage equality in Maryland.

&nbsp;
<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>The new Episcopal Bishop of the Diocese of Washington, D.C., on Tuesday endorsed the legislative campaign now underway to legalize same sex marriage in Maryland.</em></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>The Rt. Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, wrote on the Washington Post website that gay marriage opponents should not be so certain the Bible is on their side. In her reading the Bible</em></span></p>

<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>... condemns exploitative sexual activity that is the antithesis of loving, committed relationships. The Bible is silent on the subject of same-gender monogamous relationships.</em></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
&nbsp;

In Pasadena, Rev Susan Boyle called the ruling a "victory", reversing the Catholic bishops' argument from religious freedom:
&nbsp;
<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>The Rev. Susan Russell of All Saints Pasadena, where they have refused to sign marriage licenses for any couple until gay couples could be legally wed, went straight to rejoicing.</em></span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>Russell, an Episcopal priest, called it a victory for</em></span></p>

<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>...all Americans who believe that the "liberty and justice for all" in the pledge we teach our children really means ALL. It is also a victory over those who erroneously believe that the freedom of religion guaranteed by the First Amendment gives them freedom to write their theology on marriage -- or anything else -- into our Constitution.</em></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>Russell dismisses the notion this tramples on freedom of religion, saying in a statement that everyone is</em></span></p>

<blockquote>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #000080;"><em>... just as free today to decide for themselves whether God equally blesses our marriages. What the 9th Circuit Court said today is that they are NOT free to decide whether the Constitution equally protects them.</em></span></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
&nbsp;
<h6 class="zemanta-related-title" style="font-size: 1em;">Related articles</h6>
&nbsp;
<ul class="zemanta-article-ul">
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://enlightenedcatholicism-colkoch.blogspot.com/2012/02/prop-8-to-supremes-plus-some.html">Prop 8 To The Supremes Plus Some Interesting Poll Data</a><em> (Enlightened Catholicism)</em></li>
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://www.mlp.org/article.php/Proposition8RuledUnconstitutional">Marriage Equality Victory: Proposition 8 Unconstitutional</a> <em>(More Light Presbyterians)</em></li>
<li class="zemanta-article-ul-li"><a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/prop-8-gay-marriage-san-diego-mayor.html">Prop. 8: San Diego mayor, once a gay-marriage foe, cheers ruling</a> (latimesblogs.latimes.com)</li>
</ul>
&nbsp;
<div class="zemanta-pixie" style="margin-top: 10px; height: 15px;"><a class="zemanta-pixie-a" title="Enhanced by Zemanta" href="http://www.zemanta.com/"><img class="zemanta-pixie-img" style="border: none; float: right;" src="http://img.zemanta.com/zemified_c.png?x-id=9e0f77c5-1fe3-4c94-a4f7-57863d188843" alt="Enhanced by Zemanta" /></a></div>

A Conservative Warning on Gay Marriage: Judge Walker Was Right

Many conservatives are outraged at Judge Walker's verdict striking down California's Proposition H8. Notice though, that GOP politicians are treading very carefully - some are starting to recognize that hatred and bigotry can be a vote loser, not the vote winner it once was. Note also, some conservative voiced are recognizing the solid conservative and judicial foundations of his judgement.

This reading, at Fox News (can you believe) is one of the best I have seen:

My Fellow Conservatives, Think Carefully About Your Opposition to Gay Marriage

As a conservative Republican representing the next generation of attitudes towards gays and lesbians, I encouraged the readers of FoxNews.com last January to take a careful look at the arguments and evidence in the Prop 8 trial, Perry v. Schwarzenegger.

The case was presented by a constitutional conservative, Ted Olson, who helped found the Federalist Society, successfully argued Bush v. Gore to the Supreme Court (among fifty-five other cases), and was George W. Bush’s Solicitor General. Working with his Democratic legal partner David Boies, Olson sought to prove that marriage equality is a constitutional question, not a partisan issue.

The trial assembled a thorough record of evidence that Prop 8 unreasonably discriminates against gays and lesbians, relegating them to second-class citizenship. Their plaintiffs, Kristen Perry and Sandy Steir, Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrullo, are the face of the marriage equality movement. They wish to share in the myriad societal, economic and psychological benefits of marriage, which the Supreme Court has ruled is a fundamental right owed to all Americans. By denying them the right to marry because of their sexual orientation and gender, Olson and Boies argued that Prop 8 violates the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment, and is unconstitutional.

Among the seventeen witnesses Olson and Boies called to the stand were experts in areas of psychology, political science, economics, socio medical sciences and history. 

Economists testified to the economic harm caused to same-sex couples and their children; political scientists to their political vulnerability; sociologists and psychologists to the societal stigma associated with homosexuality; historians to the history of marriage shedding its discriminatory restrictions over time. 

Other testimony included Ryan Kendal, a young gay man who failed a “conversion therapy” attempt to alter his sexuality from gay to straight and the Republican Mayor of San Diego, a former police chief, who testified that “if government tolerates discrimination against anyone for any reason, it becomes an excuse for the public to do exactly the same thing.”

Surprisingly, the defense’s two lone witnesses also offered compelling reasons to favor of marriage equality. They testified that allowing homosexuals to marry would increase family stability and improve the lives of their children; that sexual orientation is unchangeable; that gays and lesbians have faced a long history of discrimination, including Prop 8. 

Another defense witness’ testimony had to be withdrawn as it proved the discriminatory nature of the Prop 8 campaign, which the Plaintiff’s lawyers then submitted as evidence to embolden their case. 

-(Read the full article)

Got that? Evidence submitted for the defendants in the case, which was intended to support Prop 8 against marriage equality,  ended up supporting the plaintiffs - confirming that gay marriage would increase, not harm family stability, and improve, not harm, the lives of children.

Why Catholics Support Gay Marriage.

Research results have consistently shown that US Catholics nationally are more supportive of gay rights (including gay marriage), and do not agree with the Vatican teaching that homosexual relationships are morally wrong. What has not been clear from research is why this should be, when the formal Vatican doctrine, and the publicly stated position of the bishops, is so different. The same conundrum was posed even more sharply this month in Argentina, where polls showed that in this overwhelmingly Catholic country, where the bishops very publicly opposed it, 70% of the population supported the introduction of full family equality.

In California, two separate polls released within days, by Field and by PRRI, confirm the patterns we have become accustomed to: over the longer term view, support for equality has grown steadily; Democrats and independents are supportive, Republicans are not; younger voters are strongly supportive - and Californian Catholics narrowly support marriage equality.

The difficulty with most research results for demographic sub-samples, such as "women", or "Latinos" , 0r "over 50's" is that without deeper statistical analysis, it is never quite clear whether the differences seen between groups are specific to those groups, or just the result of hidden demographics distorting the groups being examined.

The great thing about the research from PRRI, is that it addresses that problem by taking a two-level split of a large sample, to consider religion within ethnic groups. It thus standardises for ethnicity when considering religion - and the results are truly fascinating, especially against the background of marriage equality in Argentina. It turns out that among all religious groupings, Latino Catholics are the most supportive of marriage equality - and Latino Protestants are the most strongly opposed.  In California, what appears to be Catholic support for marriage equality is specifically Latino Catholic support: White Catholic views are pretty similar to White (mainline) Protestants. Conversely, the strong Latino Catholic support does not show up in overall Latino support, because it is balanced by strong opposition from Latino Protestants.

It gets better. If the report simply left it there, that would be interesting, but would simply beg a couple of further questions. Why should Latino/a Catholics differ so strongly from White Catholics, and even more strongly from Latino/a Protestants? Why are Catholics and Protestants so different to Evangelicals, who are very strongly opposed? Why are Blacks overall less supportive than either Whites or Latinos? So, it is great to report that it does not stop there. There is plenty of real good meat in this report worth chewing over, both theologically and politically, which offers some real insight into the reasons for these discrepancies.

One dramatic impact on thinking about marriage, is what people are hearing from their clergy.  Catholics are more likely than other groups to be hearing anything at all from clergy about homosexuality, and White Catholics less than Latino Catholics.  Both Catholic groups, together with White Protestants, are the least likely to be hearing negative statements. Some Latino Catholics are hearing a message that flatly contradicts the position of the bishops: almost one in ten report they are hearing supportive words from their Catholic priests about homosexuality.

(With the continuing debate in some Protestant groups about gay ordination, it is important to note that a small majority of Protestant clergy seem more likely to support than to discourage gay and lesbian relationships, by 21% to 19% ).

This has huge implications for the push for marriage equality, for inclusion in church, and for the Catholic Church in particular.  First, it confirms once again that religious belief and homosexual relationships are not incompatible. It is simply untrue that "Christians" as a whole reject homosexuality, or same sex marriage. A growing minority of Christians, and some clergy, support such relationships.  This increasing support within the churches will ease the way towards greater LGBT inclusion in church. For the Catholic bishops, the signs are ominous. At a national level, their voices have been among the most prominent arguing against gay marriage, gay adoption, civil unions, and protection from discrimination. But this message from the top of the pyramid does not seem to be getting through on the ground. It is remarkable that Catholics are the least likely of all groups to be hearing negative messages about homosexuality from their priests, and even more so that some Catholics are being told to be supportive, or are hearing messages that are neutral rather than critical.

Why this disconnect? Could it be that the local priests are in closer contact, with real people. both gay and straight, and so more in touch with reality? Another finding in the research is that people's views on homosexuality will be strongly influenced by the parents of gay men and lesbians. Any priest is likely to have several such parents in his congregation, in addition to some gay people themselves who have not been driven away from the church, or into hiding in a closet. This direct personal knowledge will be showing him the falsity of official discourse, that we are not "disordered", driven by our sexuality away from God, or interested only in "gratuitous self-indulgence".  Rather than repeating the lies, many would simply prefer to hold their tongues - and some are taking the remarkable step, given their dependent position, of directly contradicting the bishops' message.

If the bishops are unable to speak directly to gay men, lesbians or their parents, they would be wise to at least listen carefully to what their priests could be telling them. If they continue to not do so, they will simply continue to lose further credibility, and will suffer greater loss of authority, just as they have already done on contraception, and as the Argentinian bishops have now done on marriage equality.