Civil Marriage Versus Religious Marriage

In their efforts to deny LGBT couples civil marriage rights, one of the standard ploys of the Christianists and Mormons is to conflate civil marriage with religious/church marriage. The two are entirely different and civil marriage for same sex couples in no way imposes any obligation on religious denominations to recognize civil marriages. Unfortunately, as is typically the case with the Christianists and Mormons in respect to this issue, the truth means nothing and they knowingly disseminate lies and untruths. All to often the supporters of marriage equality fail to make a proper argument as to why civil marriage for gays poses no threat to religious/church marriage. In his testimony before the New Hampshire legislature, Episcopal Bishop Eugene Robinson did a masterful job of distinguishing between civil and religious marriage and in the process underscored the dishonesty of anti-gay marriage opponents whose real goal is not to "protect marriage' but rather to keep LGBT citizens unequal under the civil laws. Here are the details of Bishop Robinson's statement via Pam's House Blend:

*
(My name is Gene Robinson) ... and I serve as Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire. Last June my partner of 28 years and I, Mark Andrew and I, were joined in a civil union, for which we are very grateful.

*
I'm here to ask your support in making the promise of equality under the law a reality in New Hampshire by allowing us to translate that second class status into the civil right of marriage. Since January 1, 2008, some 600 civil unions have been enacted. Think about what you were told eighteen months ago by those who wanted you to be fearful of this action.

*
Has western civilization as we know it come to an end? Has your marriage to your opposite sex partner been undermined, in any way, by my professed love for and commitment to my partner? Has the family been eroded as a cornerstone of our society, or has it been strengthened by the solemn and genuine committments taken on by gay and lesbian couples in this state?

*
Does any reasonable person believe that these 600 committed couples threaten the state or the society or your marriages in any way? The fears were unfounded.
*
It turns out that you were right to do what you did. And now it is time to finish what you started, by making our relationships equal in the eyes of the law, and in the minds of the public, by granting marriage equality under the law to all citizens of New Hampshire.

*
Let me briefly speak to two concerns you might have, especially as it relates to people of faith. First, those who would continue to discriminate against some of our citizens, would tell you that we are changing the definition and meaning of marriage. They are absolutely right. But what they are WRONG about is in claiming that "marriage has always had ONE meaning", up until now.

*

Marriage for men in the Old Testament included multiple wives, not to mention concubines, if you were wealthy enough. Marriage until the Middle Ages was all about property, legitimacy of heirs, and inheritance rights. So decidely so that common people and serfs on an estate were not even encouraged to marry, since there was nothing to inherit, anyways.

*
While marriage has served many purposes historically, including procreation, we have never prohibited from marrying, those unable to procreate, either because of infertility or advanced age. And just 40 years ago, we changed the definition of marriage to include people of different races, a change in definition that allowed Barack Obama's parents to be married. The definition of marriage has always been evolving and the inclusion of same gender partners is simply the next logical revision of that evolution.

*
The second, the thing I most want you to remember most from my testimony is this: Religions and people of faith have nothing to fear from this bill. Indeed, many congregations, including those here in the Diocese of New Hampshire, already celebrate and bless the uniting of two people of the same gender in love, responsibility and mutual committment. Permitting two people of the same sex to declare their love for one other and to assume the responsibilities of civil marriage will affect religion in NO way.

*
House Bill #436 makes very explicit the continuing right that NO religious organization or clergyperson is obligated or otherwise required by law to officiate at ANY particular civil marriage, in violation of their first amentment freedom of religion. No denomination or faith tradition will be required to approve of the marriage of two same gender citizens.

*
Let's be clear: Civil marriage is a civil action, which has gotten confused in our society, only because clergy have been permitted to act as agents of the state, in signing marriage licenses and thereby enacting civil marriages. The STATE affects a civil marriage. Churches, synagogues and mosques may pronounce God's blessings on these marriages, if they choose, but civil marriages are still bona fide marriages, even if they are not presided over by a member of the clergy.

*
All the rights, priviledges, and responsibilities of civil marriage pertain, even if there was nothing religious involved or intended. This is clearer in countries like France, where everyone is married at the mayor's office - then those couples who are religious and desire a blessing, go to their place of worship for such a service.

*
Civil marriage is a civil act, proven by the reality that when a marriage comes unravelled, the couple doesn't go back to the church or synagogue where the service was performed to dissolve that marriage, but to the state and its courts.

*
'Holy Matrimony', that is affirming the vows made in marriage in the presence of God and in God's church, will remain undisturbed or unchanged in any way. And no denomination or faith tradition will be required to approve of the marriage of two same gender citizens.

*
As a religious person and a Bishop of the Church, permit me to ask my religious collegues who might object to marriage equality: is it right to force our religious beliefs on the rest of the citizens of this state? Just because my particular faith does not bless such marriages, does that mean that the civil right to marriage should be denied to the citizens of New Hampshire?

*
Just as we cherish our rights as religious people, not to be infringed upon by the state, so the state should be be infringed upon by the particular beliefs of the church. One purpose of the state is to protect equally all of its citizens, no matter their religious beliefs. Later today, you will consider making sure that our transgender citizens are protected from violence and discrimination, a bill I support wholeheartedly.

*
And in this bill, you are merely giving all of our citizens the same and equal right, to live productive lives in stable and recognized marriages. Equal protection under the law is the dream and the promise of America. There is hardly a more-oft repeated phrase in the Old and New Testaments that this: "Be Not Afraid."

*
Ladies and gentleman of the Judiciary Committee, don't let the religious opponents to marriage equality you will hear from today and in the days to come, make you afraid to do what is right. As Americans we are promised equal protection under the law, and the inalieneable right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

*
"Be Not Afraid" to make this equal protection a reality for ALL of the citizens of New Hampshire. Thank you.

*

I could not state the plain simple truth any more clearly than Gene Robinson did. We need to recall his words and repeat them over and over to all legislators who will listen.