http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30146878/
___
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
when churches step
outside that sphere in order to play (as Roger puts it) a robust role in
public
life, as they have a right to do, aren't they necessarily expected to honor
the
public laws?
But therein lies the problem Steve. Religious institutions and
individuals often
Art, it sounds like you think houses of worship will retain their power to
solemnize civil marriages out of sheer inertia more than anything else. But
that suggests to me that the status quo can be moved even in the absence of a
widespread clamor for change so long as the interests are
I have been away and apologize if this point has been made already. Is there
reason to believe that religious lobbyists will not propose and succeed in
obtaining religious exemptions from laws governing the performance of
marriages? In other words, be permitted to solemnize marriages that are
Thanks for posting this Marci.
This is particularly true in the area of choice. People forget that there are
organizations such as Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights, or that Jewish
Law *requires* an abortion to save the of a pregnant woman and thus the extreme
position of the Catholic
I agree that the ability to solemnize civil marriages is a red herring issue.
The important thing is control of religious ceremonies and the right to live in
accord with one's own conscience. The clergy's power to create a legal
relationship is necessarily a power delegated from the state;
There should have been a political deal to be struck here. But the hardliners
on either side are not much interested in it. If religious conservatives use
religious liberty concerns only to argue against recognizing same-sex marriage
at all, and don't shift the emphasis to exemptions until
There should have been a political deal to be struck here. But the hardliners
on either side are not much interested in it. If religious conservatives use
religious liberty concerns only to argue against recognizing same-sex marriage
at all, and don't shift the emphasis to exemptions until it
I find all that Alan says helpful, and what Eugene adds in his later
message is also helpful. A couple of reactions:
1. Alan's concerns, I think, largely apply (and are meant to apply)
whether the religious garb is banned by a religion specific rule or by
some more general policy of the sort
Not to keep beating a dead horse, but we really do accomplish a lot by
analogizing gay and lesbian autonomy rights and religious liberty autonomy
rights. As Chip suggests below, under this analogy you would exempt religious
organizations from applicable anti-discrimination laws -- as was done
I worked in the effort to get the exemption in the ENDA bill broadened in 2007
from a very narrow provision to one analogous to the Title VII religious-hiring
exemption. I agree that that's basically the right way to handle the bill. At
that time, part of the political dynamic was that the
One version of ENDA that was proposed in 2007 contained significantly narrowed
protections for religious entities. The following post from Melissa Rogers
does a good job of describing the narrowed protections and many of the related
issues. I would add to her thoughts that the narrowed
Why do you need a deal to repeal DOMA in a democratic Congress? Just curious
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Douglas Laycock layco...@umich.edu
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 17:13:57
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Deals
Maybe you don't. I'm certainly not a vote counter. But they need unanimity
among Dems plus one or two Rs in the Senate, at least until they change the
rule that allows filibusters without the pain of shutting down all other
business and standing there talking for hours.
And even in the
Chip, I admit that exactly one paragraph of my article discussed hate
speech prosecution as a potential
threat and I cited as support the case of Sweden's Ake Green who was
sentenced to a month in jail for inciting
hatred because of anti-gay preaching (incidentally, I noted in the
article that
15 matches
Mail list logo
