But now they denounce it as a mere excuse for bigotry

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-31
Author(s):  
Andrew Koppelman
Keyword(s):  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Religious Dissent ◽  
High Profile

A few high-profile struggles transformed the perception of religious liberty. Beginning as recently as 2014, the Left began to regard a few individuals who refused to facilitate same-sex weddings—wedding photographer Elaine Huguenin, Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, baker Jack Phillips—as the paradigm for religious dissent. Soon the term came to be seen as an excuse for discrimination.

The Implications of Religious Liberty

2017 ◽  
pp. 143-162
Keyword(s):  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
The Political ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Public Discussion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Faith Based

The political terrain surrounding the legalization of same-sex marriage and the need to accommodate individual's faith based objections have been part of the public discussion since the passage of initial marriage equality statutes. These exemptions played an important part in the bill's passage and have gone largely unquestioned from proponents of marriage equality. This chapter discusses the heightened lawmaking efforts by opponents insisting on broad protection measures for religious claims based on opposition directed towards homosexuality. This Chapter discusses the resulting tension between religious freedom and marriage equality.

Sexuality, Third-Party Harms, and the “Live-and-Let-Live” Approach to Religious Exemptions

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-61
Author(s):  
Carlos A. Ball
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Business Owners ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Religious Dissent ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Antidiscrimination Law ◽  
Bisexual And Transgender ◽  
History Of

For several years now, a group of prominent religious liberty scholars in the United States have been defending what they call a “live-and-let-live” approach to accommodating religious dissent in the era of marriage equality. The proposed approach calls on the state to avoid taking sides on contested moral issues when individuals of faith claim that their religious beliefs require them to refrain from facilitating marriages by same-sex couples. The objective, it is argued, is to adopt policies that allow both sides to live according to their values. This article critiques the “live-and-let-live” solution to religious exemptions from LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) equality measures by focusing on questions of harms. It argues that the proposed approach calls for a weighing of harms that is largely unprecedented in the history of American antidiscrimination law and problematic in its own right. The article also explains that the approach is premised on questionable assumptions and predictions about the absence of any meaningful harm to LGBT individuals when business owners provide goods and services to the general public, but refuse to do so for same-sex couples on religious grounds.

Religious Liberty

2019 ◽  
pp. 54-75
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
The 1960S

This chapter places U.S. religious liberty principles in historical context. The 1960s to present day are examined, providing a provocative analysis of religious liberty cases and the ongoing role courts play in this debate, coupled with the legalization of same-sex marriage. A legal analysis is provided for Supreme Court cases.

Sincere Believers, Bigots, or Superstitious Fools?

2020 ◽  
pp. 154-180
Author(s):  
Linda C. McClain
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Civil Laws ◽  
Harmful Effects

This chapter traces the Supreme Court’s evolving approach to the constitutional rights of LGBTQ persons and whether moral disapproval justifies discriminatory criminal or civil laws. It evaluates the bigotry versus morality dynamic in these cases. Justice Kennedy never referred to bigotry in his landmark opinions in Romer v. Evans, Lawrence v. Texas (overruling Bowers v. Hardwick), United States v. Windsor, and Obergefell v. Hodges, yet the dissenters claimed he branded traditional believers as bigots and their beliefs about sexuality and marriage as bigotry. The chapter considers the argument that animus, a term Kennedy used, is the same as bigotry. Kennedy’s Obergefell opinion nowhere mentions animus or bigotry, focusing on the harmful effects of laws barring same-sex couples from marriage. Although Kennedy referred to religious opponents of same-sex marriage as sincere, dissenters countered that his opinion invited treatment of believers as bigots, setting the stage for future threats to their religious liberty.

scholarly journals Protecting the rights of LGBTIQ people around the world: Beyond marriage equality and the decriminalisation of homosexuality

2021 ◽  
pp. 1037969X2098665
Author(s):  
Paula Gerber ◽  
Senthorun Raj ◽  
Cai Wilkinson ◽  
Anthony Langlois
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
High Profile ◽  
The World ◽  
Sexual Conduct ◽  
The Many ◽  
Rights Issues

Discussions about the human rights of LGBTIQ people tend to centre around two vastly different issues, namely, marriage equality and the criminalisation of same-sex sexual conduct. However, looking only at these two high-profile issues ignores the many pressing concerns facing LGBTIQ people around the world. This article identifies and analyses eight other human rights issues that urgently need addressing, in order to respect the rights of LGBTIQ people across the globe.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document