The Law, Your Beliefs, and Reconciling Both

Yesterday, I was venting about my personal feelings about SCOTUS and those who oppose it under the guise of love and friendship. It was emotionally-fueled and part of my processing of only a small layer of feelings that I have in regards to how my sexual orientation has affected my personal relationships. 

Today is a new day. I have seen stories posted that there are local governments withholding marriage licenses, refusing to perform weddings, and other various refusals. These are all under the claim of religious freedom. There is one thing that I know for certain, while we may have won the fight for marriage equality on a federal level, the fight to peacefully exercise that liberty is nowhere close to over. 

There is so much about this that I want to address, I hardly know where begin. I wanted to say that I didn't know if these local governments had a leg to stand on. After doing some research, I can tell you that they do... and they don't. I am no lawyer, nor claim to be, but here is the part where I dazzle you with my powers of reading comprehension... and give you a headache at the absurd legal nightmare that we are bound up in.

As for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA):  

H.R. 1308 states, in Section 7-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE UNAFFECTED.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect, interpret, or in any way address that portion of the First Amendment prohibiting laws respecting the establishment of religion (referred to in this section as the ‘Establishment Clause’). Granting government funding, benefits, or exemptions, to the extent permissible under the Establishment Clause, shall not constitute a violation of this Act. As used in this section, the term ‘granting’, used with respect to government funding, benefits, or exemptions, does not include the denial of government funding, benefits, or exemptions.

The Supreme Court, on June 26, 2015, came to a decision on marriage. They decreed that all legal residents and citizens of the United States of America who are eligible for marriage (eligibility being defined as adults aged 18 and above, who are not legally married, being of sound mind to sign a legally binding marriage contract of their own free will) are entitled to legally marry ANY legal resident or citizen who is also eligible for marriage regardless of the assigned sex of either party. They decreed that it is unconstitutional to deny them this.

The verbiage of Sec. 7 of the RFRA indicates that it is does not allow for government offices to withhold or deny any government benefits as an act of religious freedom. Meaning there are no government offices who are allowed to deny a marriage license. In addition to this, government offices and government officials have a duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution and abide by what the Supreme Court's rulings on what is or is not constitutional.

HOWEVER... There are other laws at play here. The employees of these offices are still protected by discrimination laws. And here is where you take an aspirin, because it's going to get all kinds of screwy.

If an employee determines that a job duty violates their religious convictions, the employer is required to offer an alternative for them. They cannot be fired for their refusal based on religious convictions. Since a government office cannot discriminate against a same-sex couple, they are also responsible for finding an employee who will process the license. A government office administrator is not supposed to allow for the office to cease operations. However, the administrator is also protected by the same discrimination laws that allow for the clerical employees to refuse to perform that duty. So then it falls on that administrative employee's higher-up to continue the process. It keeps rising through the ranks, and if no one can be found, or resolution can be made, it goes to the courts. First at the state level, then the federal level.

Your head hurt? My head hurts... 

Now that I've figured out  explained  confused the hell out of everyone, I want to talk about these acts of discrimination. No one is protected here. The government can be sued by employees who are not given accommodation AND the couple being discriminated against. The employees feel their rights are being violated. The couple being denied the license is being discriminated against. There are no winners in this. 

Yes, you have the right to be protected for your religious beliefs. They should be. 

But so are the rights of the LGBT couples to receive their marriage license and not be discriminated against. 

One injustice does not justify the other. Two wrongs don't make a right. However you want to say it, it's illegal to discriminate on any basis. 

I'm now speaking directly to all of you who are opposing marriage equality under the banner of religion. I'm going to take an unorthodox stance for someone who doesn't believe as you do. I'm going to talk to you as if I did share your faith. Personally, I believe that you can reconcile your faith and the law. In fact, I know you can. Because your Bible commands it, but I'll get to that.

If you're a public officer or politician, you have chosen to be a public servant. That means that you serve the WHOLE public, not just those who holds the "correct" political or religious beliefs, or whose sexual orientation you agree with. Further, you have a duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution and to follow your local and federal laws. 

Now this is for everyone: 

Contrary to what you might think, America is not a Christian nation, nor founded on the Christian religion. (Exactly 218 years and one month before SCOTUS ruled on marriage for same-sex couples, President John Adams signed the Treaty of Tripoli. Article 11 clearly states this fact.) Just as a majority of English-speaking citizens does not make English the official language of the United States, a majority of Christian citizens does not make Christianity our official religion (especially since that would invalidate our constitutional right to freedom of religion). The separation of church and state further solidifies the reality, that the United States of America is NOT a theocracy. 

As Christians, you should be ecstatic that we are not a theocracy AND that there is a separation of church and state. This separation allows for you to practice your religion freely. If we were governed by religion, what would keep extremists from forming a fundamentalist society with infarctions punishable by death? You know how we are fighting ISIS and Islamic extremists from oppressing their citizens? What would keep Christian leaders from abusing that power in the same way? The basis for the separation of church and state is to protect all citizens from that kind of oppression. 

Now I ask you, "What gives you the authority to use your religion to keep others from their freedoms and liberties? Does invoking 'God's Authority' not reek of the same hubris that religious extremists are guilty of? Now it's opposing marriage equality. Where do you draw the line?"

There is the small matter of the fact that 1 Corinthians commands you not to judge those who are not in the church. It's not your place to hold them to God's law. 

Paul states in 1 Cor 5:9-13 (NIrV)

9 I wrote a letter to you to tell you to stay away from people who commit sexual sins. 10 I didn’t mean the people of this world who sin in this way. I didn’t mean those who always want more and more. I didn’t mean those who cheat or who worship statues of gods. In that case you would have to leave this world! 11 But here is what I am writing to you now. You must stay away from anyone who claims to be a believer but does evil things. Stay away from anyone who commits sexual sins. Stay away from anyone who always wants more and more things. Stay away from anyone who worships statues of gods. Stay away from anyone who tells lies about others. Stay away from anyone who gets drunk or who cheats. Don’t even eat with people like these.

12 Is it my business to judge those outside the church? Aren’t you supposed to judge those inside the church? 13 God will judge those outside. Scripture says, “Get rid of that evil person!”

Unless I'm mistaken, it sounds like God doesn't want you to judge or set a Biblical standard to anyone who is not a part of your faith. And while, yes, there are LGBTQ+ individuals who profess Christianity, that is a matter to address within your church. Not within your local government office. But even in matters of judging your fellow brethren, Christ warns you repeatedly to exercise caution and gentleness in doing so. Not to openly and relentlessly do so. 

Further still, your Bible does not support what you are doing. In your vehemence to keep same-sex couples from getting married based on a few verses, verses that have questionable relevancy, I believe you have confused faith for moral superiority. You're probably getting defensive now, but answer this for yourself:  

Is God omnipotent, omniscient, and fully in control of all things in this world? 

If you answered "no," then you probably have a lot of soul-searching to do. If you answered "yes," then ask yourself:

Does God not work all things to His will and glory?

If you answered that he does, then I don't understand why you've abandoned that belief. 

Romans 13:1-5 (NIrV): 13 All of you must obey those who rule over you. There are no authorities except the ones God has chosen. Those who now rule have been chosen by God. 2 So whoever opposes the authorities opposes leaders whom God has appointed. Those who do that will be judged. 3 If you do what is right, you won’t need to be afraid of your rulers. But watch out if you do what is wrong! You don’t want to be afraid of those in authority, do you? Then do what is right, and you will be praised. 4 The one in authority serves God for your good. But if you do wrong, watch out! Rulers don’t carry a sword for no reason at all. They serve God. And God is carrying out his anger through them. The ruler punishes anyone who does wrong. 5 You must obey the authorities. Then you will not be punished. You must also obey them because you know it is right.

That's pretty clear, isn't it? A follower of Jesus Christ is serving God when they obey the law. Our law is now that it is legal for same-sex couples to marry. Period. Full Stop. And as they say in the U.K., End Of.

Your opposition is condescending

I have seen several memes floating around Facebook that my conservative connections have been posting. They all roughly say the same thing, but this one… this one really grinds my gears.

"But, Lisa," you say, "why the fuck do you care what some bigoted assholes think? You know there are plenty of Christians who are LGBTQ+, and plenty of Christians are very accepting of the community. You know that there is a lot of theological and scholarly analysis into the seven verses that "address" homosexuality, and what they truly refer to. You're getting offended over someone's bullshit opinion! Chill out, yo!"

In my anger and frustration, I want to address all of it. It's hypocrisy up one side and horse shit down the other. The lack of compassion. The hypocrisy of cherry-picking verses to impose their beliefs on others while not actually adhering to the other rules for themselves. 


I scrapped this three times because I could never focus on what really pissed me off. It's the deception. It's all an arrogant, patronizing, dirty lie. And I'm going to call you on that bullshit. I say to all the people who've posted this stupid picture:

You don't love me. You don't love the LGBTQ+ community. At least not in any way that is genuine and intimate. Love has many definitions. Merriam-Wesbster lists nine. The one you mean is listed at number four: 

screen cap from linked definition

And really, you only mean part (2) of "a." I don't need your distant "concern." I don't want to speak for the whole community here, but I'm willing to bet that most of them don't either. This "Yes, I still love you" line leaves me with the bitter aftertaste of condescension. The people who love me are active participants in my life. Their love for me is active. Their love for me is palpable. Their love for me inspires them to make time for me in their lives. Their love for me breathes support and acceptance and protection. You? No, you don't love me. 

Since you don't love me, you cannot possibly be my friend. Friendship fosters intimacy, honesty, trust, love, compassion, generosity, and SUPPORT. 

My real friends don't always agree with me. They'll give me all the reasons they don't agree with me on something, and then they'll support me the best way they know how. They understand that I might be on a path towards pain and frustration, but they will come along for the ride anyway. And when they're wrong, they'll say they're wrong. And when they're right, they don't rub my nose in it. (Well, maybe a little, but only after they've dried my tears and held my hand. Mostly to get me to laugh.) So yes, we don't have to agree with each other, but we do have to support each other. 

My closest friends love all of me. They may not like parts of me, but they love all of me. They see me as a whole person and say, "yes, this person is worthwhile." They don't put conditions on me. They don't ask me to hide part of myself. They want me to be myself all the time. Even when they might be a little uncomfortable or disagree with me. They still love me. They don't want me to conform so that I'm more socially acceptable. 

Yes, you are judging me; and yes, you do allow people to bully me. Even if you've never actually verbalized your judgment, this picture is your judgment of me. By posting this photo, you've actually told me that you will never accept me as a whole person. As a whole, I'm funny, charming, intelligent, articulate, nerdy, disorganized, stubborn, passionate, empathetic, socially-minded, ambitious, loyal, caring, and more. I'm also a mother of two daughters. I'm a wife to a cis-gender man. I'm also a survivor of multiple abuses. I struggle with some mental illness because of those abuses. I'm an unapologetic feminist. Oh, and I happen to be a queer, cis-gender woman that identifies somewhere in the middle of the sexuality spectrum. (If you're binary-minded, the label "bisexual" is where you'll put me.) My sexuality is, by far, the least interesting thing about me, but it is very important to me. You have decided that you don't support me because of that sexuality. 

As for allowing people to bully me... Do I think you'd actually stand up for me? No! You already don't stand up for my rights, or the rights of other gay, lesbian, and bisexual people to marry their same-sex partner. You have allowed politicians, religious groups, and bigots to keep LGBTQ+ individuals from being afforded the same rights and freedoms under the law. You have not stood up and spoken out about the beatings, the suicides, the murders, the homelessness, or the harassment that this community has been dealing with. No, you hide behind your seven misinterpreted verses and tell us Jesus loves us. Your silence against these atrocities is deafening. Your unwillingness to stand up against it makes you complicit. 

Are you entitled to your opinion on these matters, entitled to your beliefs? Absolutely. No one is silencing you or attacking you. What you are experiencing is not persecution. What you're experiencing is a leveling of the playing field. You're losing control over other people's lives. Please do not consider yourselves to have ever come close to real religious persecution. Not while you can openly wear symbols of your faith, go to houses of worship, put a bumper sticker on your car and not fear your life or imprisonment. See, being a Christian in some parts of the world is frightening. Being gay is scary in those places too. It is still scary in America. It's just a little less scary than it used to be. 

Ultimately, whether you agree or disagree with marriage equality is irrelevant. Equality won out in 1967, and it won out in 2015 and everyone can marry any consenting adult of sound mind that is able to sign a marriage contract. Maybe you should join us in 2015.