Why Religious Reassurances Matter

Timothy Kincaid

May 21st, 2009

The US Constitution’s Freedom of Religion Clause protects churches from having to conduct sacraments that are contrary to their beliefs. So no minister need fear that he or his church will be forced against his will to conduct a marriage ceremony between a same-sex couple.

But the peculiar practice in this country of having ministers vested with power by the State to make civil pronouncements of marriage have led to confusion. Most people, ministers included, know that Catholics don’t have to officiate at the marriage of non-Catholics, or Rabbis for non-Jews, but the battles over gay rights in recent years have caused a great many people to fear that denying gay couples religious recognition might fall under the category of illegal discrimination.

The 2008 Clergy Voices Survey (pdf) provides illustration of the importance of reassuring the population that religious freedoms will be protected.

The Clergy Voices Survey measures the views of “Mainline” Christian denominations, those six Christian churches that embrace a more liberal theology and whose parishoners make up about 18% of the population.

When asked about civil recognition for same-sex couples, Mainline clergy replied as follows:

  • 33% said gay couples should be allowed to marry
  • 32% said gay couples should be allowed civil unions
  • 35% said gay couples should not have state recognition

But then the survey noted something interesting

Among clergy who initially did not support allowing gay couples to marry, support increased significantly when they were provided with an assurance that no church or congregation would be required to perform same-sex marriage services. With this religious liberty assurance, support among clergy jumped from one-third support to nearly half (46%), a movement of 13 points. Nearly all of this movement occurred among clergy who initially supported civil unions.

One would assume that clergy are aware that their religious rights are protected, moreso than anyone. But 13% of Mainline clergy who would otherwise support marriage equality needed assurance that this would not impose on churches or ministers.

If all it takes to get a 13% shift in the position of Mainline ministers – who wield great community influence due to their position – is reassurance of a respect for the rights they already have protected by the Constitution, then by all means let’s reassure them.


May 21st, 2009

It is interesting that so many know so little about their own rights, especially for a group that are educated and literate enough to be ministers.

I don’t have a problem with laws that clearly state that churches don’t have to perform any marriage that the church opposes, but the very long exemption language offered by Gov Lynch of Maine gave me pause. Leading gay legal groups should get together on come up with language that does the job of exempting churches from having to perform marriages without opening new cans of worms by possibly legalizing other forms of anti- gay discrimation.


May 21st, 2009

If Christians deny civil rights to others because they perceive they won’t be allowed to discriminate against the others, then the Christians have already lost. What they teach and practice is not what Jesus taught or practiced.

Emily K

May 21st, 2009

I’m not a huge fan of enabling ignorance among the ignorant. But if this is what is needed, fine. It’s like people who double-click on hyperlinks – one click is really all you need but they feel like nothing will launch unless the second click is added.

David Brian Holt

May 21st, 2009

You’re being very kind to think that mainline clergy have much influence in the country anymore. They are seen as “apostates” by many evangelicals. It was encouraging to read, however, that over 60% of UCC clergy are in favor of full marriage rights. That number was probably much lower a few years ago but has been moved higher due to noble action by their national denomination.

Timothy Kincaid

May 21st, 2009


I think perhaps they weild more influence than you are alling. Mainline parishoners make up 24% of American voters.

And the word of a minister can give a sense of “permission” to a non-religious American who still considers themself to be generically “Christian”.

As long as “non-active Christains” are not hearing a uniform anti-gay message, then they can more easily do what is right without subconciously feeling they are going against God.


May 21st, 2009

Religion will end the world…just wait.

Priya Lynn

May 21st, 2009

John said “Leading gay legal groups should get together on come up with language that does the job of exempting churches from having to perform marriages without opening new cans of worms by possibly legalizing other forms of anti- gay discrimation.”.

I agree John. I certainly don’t trust those laymen gays who assure us the overly broad language allowing for religious discrimination only gives churches the rights that they already had under the U.S. constitution to refuse to perform marriages they don’t agree with.

Jason D

May 21st, 2009

Jeff, every end is a beginning.

el polacko

May 21st, 2009

the idea that civil rights legislation should contain an asterisked allowance for discrimination by some groups is disgustingly wrong. why this exemption for “religion” when many religions have no issue with equal marriage rights ?
we are talking about registering relationships with the STATE, just as heteros have to do.. what happens in other ceremonies has nothing to do with it.


May 22nd, 2009

I support re-assuring clergy that they will not lose their rights in order to grant us ours. Put it in legislation if need be.


May 25th, 2009

I think these religious reassurances are more to prevent potential scenarios such as if a gay couple presented themselves to their Catholic priest for marriage, even though the Church does not permit same-gender sexual expression. If said gay couple were to try to make a legal issue of it, this would force the state to try to legislate in matters of doctrine and faith, which is most definitely NOT the purpose of the government or courts, at least in the USA. I’m all for full civil marriage equality, but for a gay marriage to be recognized by a faith group, that’s for the faith group to determine, not the state. If I found a man I wanted to marry, I’d love for a full Nuptial Mass, but I’d have to settle for a civil ceremony. For change to occur in my church, it would have to occur within my church’s processes.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.