You could add the op[position to enhance d
protection for religions workers in the workplace because such legislation might
empower claims impinging on gay rights, gay groups that sued Yeshiva University
over it refusal to allow gay couples access to a married only dorm in its
medical school, the opposition to an exemption for Catholic Charities in Boston,
the suit over doctors refusing to assist lesbian couple have a child by artificial
insemination and on and on….What ever the merits of particular suits,
there has been as pattern of opposition to religious claims in the gay rights context.
. Marc Stern f From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Douglas Laycock From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Newsom Michael Could you give some examples of gay rights
proponents who ignore religious liberty interests? Doug Laycock's Answer: The gay
rights groups organized and led the charge that killed the Religious Liberty
Protection Act. They did it by insisting on a categorical exception for
all civil rights cases, refusing to rely on the case law that most civil rights
claims present compelling interests or their own view that all civil
rights claims present compelling interests. "All civil rights claims" would
include challenges to the male-only priesthood. It would include claims
of religious discrimination in awarding membership or leadership positions in
churches and other religions organizations. In At the state and local level, gay rights
groups insist on no religious exemption to gay rights laws or, if they can't
prevail on that, the narrowest possible definition of religious organizations
entitled to exemption. I assume it was these recurring political
conflicts, in which gay rights groups simply refuse to recognize any competing
interest on the other side of the table, that Alan Brownstein was referring to,
and not the occasional acts of disruptive protest. Of course many of the conservative
religious groups are equally intractable with respect to gay rights
organizations. In the particular case of RLPA, most of them were at
all time willing to concede the compelling-interest exception, fully
understanding that courts were likely to find a compelling interest in most
civil rights claims. Douglas Laycock University of 512-232-1341 512-471-6988 (fax) |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.