Religious Freedom Laws and Gay Rights

Recently some of the states in the South have passed bills which protect religious freedom. Most people presume that the purpose of these bills is to ensure that religious people won't have to offer services for same-sex weddings or support homosexual activity if it violates their conscience.

One particularly aggressive interviewer on CNN interrogated a woman who didn't want to offer services at a same-sex wedding. He asked her if she would serve to somebody who had violated one of the ten commandments, like committing adultery or not honoring their parents. She said yes, and so he asked what the difference was. Under pressure, she said it just seemed different to her and had no other explanation.

However, there is a viable explanation for why serving at a gay wedding is different than serving gay couples in general. Supporting those events is more closely connected to supporting certain behavior, rather than just supporting people. A better comparison for that interviewer to make would be serving at a party that celebrates adultery or a party that celebrates dishonoring one's parents. These businesses would not condone that. They may want to help gay couples, but according to their beliefs, that would mean that they won’t encourage them in homosexual activity. The exchange should not happen from an efficiency standpoint either, since the cost to the firm (including the cost to their conscience) exceeds the willingness to pay of the gay couple.

The current gay rights discussion is also frequently compared to the civil rights era for African Americans. However, withholding service from people based on who they are is much different than withholding service based on what the service is.

Someday I would like to be a public defender. I think that it would be very fulfilling to help people, even guilty people, to be put in the most free position that our laws allow. But of course this desire does not extend to me wanting to support anything wrong that they have done. Some people don’t believe business people who say they love gay people but don’t want to serve at their weddings; yet society does believe that public defenders care about the accused without supporting their crimes.

Referencing Jesus' love for the sinner but not the sin is not just an excuse of these business owners to avoid serving gay people. Many really are happy to serve gay people if it does not involve supporting homosexual activity.

People with stronger religious consciences have been less likely to join in the mocking of homosexuality, even when mocking it was more common, which was the case even just ten years ago. Yet now that their conscience tells them to withhold support from an activity that they find morally wrong, they are sometimes labeled as the worst discriminators. While I am not sure about the answer to the legal dispute, I think that an accurate view of those opposed to gay marriage will lead to better policies, and hopefully we can also work to have an accurate view of those who support gay marriage.