# Gay Marriage Ban = Religious Discrimination **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 10, 2004, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475 "2004-02-10T17:22:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/21 "2004-02-12T07:33:49Z")
> [@Jimmy1](#): > > They are? According to whom, you? Are you really in a position to pass upon the rationality of all religious tenets? How did you acquire such omniscience? By defintion, a religious belief is based on the firm personal conviction, absence of evidence and drawing solely on faith, that that belief is true. Such beliefs are not rational; they are by definition irrational. ---
**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/22 "2004-02-12T07:53:40Z")
> [@Jimmy1](#): > > . Just because there is a religious motive underlying the legislatures in how they define “marriage” I do not think should render the law invalid. The whole concept of marriage is blatantly unconstitional. The document states that there should be seperation between church and state; however, David and Anne can have a religious ritual performed and reap ridiculous governmental advantages. Marriage should be just that: a religious ritual to sanctify their union before God. The whole thing is like the government sending out weekly paychecks to adults who have been baptized as a child. - Honesty ---
**Author:** ![MrVisible](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MrVisible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrVisible)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/23 "2004-02-12T08:05:32Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > The whole concept of marriage is blatantly unconstitional. > > The document states that there should be seperation between church and state; however, David and Anne can have a religious ritual performed and reap ridiculous governmental advantages. > > Marriage should be just that: a religious ritual to sanctify their union before God. The whole thing is like the government sending out weekly paychecks to adults who have been baptized as a child. > > - Honesty Actually, that’s not right. You can be married without the involvement of any religion; go before a Justice of the Peace, sign some forms, pay a fee, and in the eyes of the state, you’re married. If you go to a church, and the pastor there puts the whammy on you, pronounces you man and wife with all the trimmings, and sends you out to begat like mad, if you haven’t signed the forms and paid the fee, you’re only married in the eyes of your church, not the state. Marriage is two distinct things: a legal contract, and a religious ritual. What I want access to is the legal contract. Do whatever you want with the religious ritual. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/24 "2004-02-12T09:07:27Z")
> [@KellyM](#): > > By defintion, a religious belief is based on the firm personal conviction, absence of evidence and drawing solely on faith, that that belief is true. That’s a very Christian paradigm of religious belief. Not all religions lay such stress on faith. You really should be less narrow in your perspective! > [@KellyM](#): > > Such beliefs are not rational; they are by definition irrational. I think not. They are arational, not founded upon reason. Irrational beliefs are those which are contrary to reason but, as you have pointed out yourself, many people hold on religious grounds beliefs which others have arrived at on rational, non-religious grounds - e.g. that murder is a Bad Thing. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/25 "2004-02-12T13:10:20Z")
> [@KellyM](#): > > Not if some people get their way. A bill was recently introduced in Virginia that would make it a misdemeanor to reside within the state of Virginia while married to a person of the same sex. Do you have a link to the bill? I’d like to read it. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ea666f/32.png) [@Jimmy1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy1)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475/26 "2004-02-12T18:05:13Z")
> [@](#): > > The presence of a religious motive for a law or other government act necessarily brings that law or action under suspicion of having been founded in an irrational basis. I guess we are simply just going to have to disagree. Religious beliefs are not in and of themselves irrational. I simply do not know who you think you are to make such a contention. > [@](#): > > This law, while perhaps motivated by religion and which certainly benefits religion, nonetheless has a basis in rationality that does not rely on religious belief. I am not so sure this is true! The “social benefit” upon which the “rationality” is based is imbued with religious considerations and to some extent is based upon religious belief. What is the “social benefit” conferred on society by churches? The “social benefit” you speak of in regards to churches is the proliferation of their religious belief through various channels of charity. The two go hand in hand. While churches are being charitable for the sake of being charitable, they are also being charitable for the purpose of spreading their religious message and the two go hand in hand and are inseparable. How do churches benefit society? By being charitable but this charity is of the religious type and not the secular type to be received from a Salvation Army or Goodwill store. Most if not all churches confer this “social benefit” because their religion instructs them to do so. Christianity has a mandate from Jesus to reach out to the poor and not only feed them but also bring the Good News to them. Christian churches outreach program allows the churches to indoctrinate and they make every attempt to do so with each charitable outreach. So I am not so sure the “rationality” is divorced from any religious belief since the social benefit is much broader than the mere distribution of food and money to the needy. In fact, I am persuaded the “rationlity” was two-fold. 1. To confer on the community a social benefit in the form of food and aid and 2. To expose people to religion which is inevitable when it comes to church based outreach programs. You do not get one without the other I am afraid because one of the primary purposes churches have outreach programs is to spread their religious message and so the rationality is built upon a “social benefit” which is by no means completely secular. If the social benefit and the rationality built upon it were purely divorced of religious beliefs, then why not extend tax exemptions only to secular charitable groups who perform the same charitable functions as churches without the religious message? Despite your contentions I think Scalia has a very compelling argument. At times it is going to be very difficult to divorce religious considerations or motives from an underlying law and while there may be a “rational” component to the law this “rationality” may still be built upon a religious motive and what is to be done then? As Scalia penned in Edwards v. Aguillar, “We surely would not strike down a law providing money to feed the hungry or shelter to the homeless if it could be demonstrated that, but for the religious beliefs of the legislators, the funds would not have been approved…” I will go one step further and say while these laws have a rational basis they also possess a religious motive. This is tantamount to providing tax exemption to churches because they perform some of these functions as a “social benefit” to society but the social benefit is built upon religious considerations and done not only out of consideration for the needy but to expose them to their religious beliefs. This is why so many civil libertarian groups denounced President Bush’s Faith Based Initiative in which money would go to churches to confer this “social benefit” on society, hence rational basis; but it was immediately recognized this would result in exposure to “religious beliefs” because after all churches are charitable for the purpose of demonstrating God’s love and bring those in need into the faith. You simply do not get one without the other from churches. What about busing kids to religious schools? The social benefit is “education” to be sure. However, if parents are sending their kids to religious schools, and most if not all religious schools have a pricy tuition attached, then they most certainly can afford to send them to the public school in which their district is located and the law looks nothing more than a pure religious motive to accommodate religious kids. Your position seems to completely separate church and state. However, not only has law permitting the accommodation of religion been permitted the fact it has a religious motive does not render it invalid. Now, while marriage was based upon religious notions, no religious message, creed, or observance for marriage is being respected in my opinion because of the long history associated with defining marriage as “man and wife.” Similar to the permissible displayal of the Nativity Scene during Christmas because of the long history of its association with Christmas. The tradition aspect is more important and fundamental than the religious. However, assuming a religious motive, I do not think the law is invalid. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-ban-religious-discrimination/228475.md?page=1)