|
|
|
Same-Sex Civil Marriage Embraces the Common Good From the Religion Section, Courier News (NJ), August 25t, 2005 The lawsuit Lewis v. Harris, which could be heard by the New Jersey Supreme Court as early as this fall, involves fourteen plaintiffs who are same-sex couples suing for full civil marriage rights. As we have seen from the Massachusetts case Goodridge v. Dept. of Health, such lawsuits bring to the fore complex and challenging questions about marriage, law and religion and how they coexist in our pluralistic society. I am a heterosexual, married man and the pastor of a congregation. I have contemplated this issue carefully and prayerfully, considering how it might affect me, my family, my congregation, and society at large. I have come to the conclusion that supporting same-sex civil marriage is entirely consistent with a religious faith that seeks justice and love of one’s neighbor as its highest aims. How does denying same-sex couples the same civil rights that opposite-sex couples have enjoyed for generations promote the common good? My answer, and the answer of many people of faith, is that it does not. The general welfare is not promoted, in either civil law or personal faith, by denying civil rights to a class of persons when no discernible benefit to society ensues from doing so. Some opponents of same-sex civil marriage argue that its prohibition is consistent with the mores of numerous religions. Yet while certain religious groups eschew the consumption of alcohol or the eating of certain foods, New Jersey law does not prohibit these items — nor does that same body of civil law oblige any religious group to partake of anything it regards as anathema. Religious convictions, no matter how sincerely felt or widely held, are not the basis of civil law in our society. Any religious community that disapproves of same-sex marriage need not bless such unions in its sanctuary; no one is suggesting that the state should compel any religious group to alter its strictures. It is also argued that granting same-sex couples the same civil status as married heterosexual couples will defy long-established tradition. But the fact that a custom has been perpetuated over a long period of time confers neither goodness nor necessity upon it. Many harmful phenomena have endured for centuries — racism and sexism, for instance. The operative moral question regarding same-sex civil marriage should not be, "Why should these rights be extended?" but rather, "Why should this discrimination be perpetuated?" The Domestic Partnership Act, enacted by the New Jersey Legislature in 2003, grants many of the civil rights of marriage to same-sex couples. But justice will only be served by full equality. Why do we have religion? Why do we have civil law? The answer to both questions is that we wish to interact with one another in ways that promote mutual well-being and prevent or alleviate suffering. People of faith, whatever their personal convictions, should embrace the freedom of every New Jersey citizen to marry the person of his or her choosing because we are all enriched by social structures which affirm and support relationships built on mutual respect, trust, and love. I and many people of faith hope that when the New Jersey Supreme Court hears Lewis v. Harris, they will rule in favor of the plaintiffs and, as the prophet said, "let justice roll down like waters." The Rev. Evan Keely is Interim Minister of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Somerset Hills in Somerville SSM CommonGood 0509.doc |
Send mail to
email@gaypasg.org with questions or comments about this web site.
|