Washington churches prepare for lawsuits over gay marriage
Jul 27, 2015, 1:24 PM | Updated: 1:25 pm
(AP image)
The effects of the Supreme Court’s June decision granting same-sex couples “equal dignity in the eyes of the law” are being assessed by interest groups across the nation, including one Washington organization that is preparing churches for lawsuits.
“What we’ve seen in different places is complaints have been filed against [churches] because a same-sex couple wanted to use their facility for a wedding,” Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, told KIRO Radio’s Dave Ross
Blackholm, who received a law degree from Seattle University, believes people of faith who don’t support gay marriage or transgender issues are under attack after the Supreme Court decision.
“There is an effort to target people, establish precedent, and to sue people so it becomes increasingly dangerous to state publicly or act on the belief that I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman, that I believe gender is fixed and not fluid, and that I believe sexuality is best expressed within monogamous heterosexual marriage,” he said.
“Those beliefs are now a legitimate legal liability and we have to recognize that,” Blackholm said, noting that organizations inspired by faith need to be prepared if, for example, an employee suddenly decides to change his or her gender.
To address such concerns, the institute has scheduled a series of workshops across the state, tailored to church officials, as a guide to legal issues surrounding marriage equality.
“The reality of the new world that we are in — on the part of a few, this is not most of who disagree with churches on this issue — there is a desire to push [churches] further and further into the closet because of what they believe about marriage and sexuality and gender and those things,” Blackholm said.
The workshops are largely based upon the Alliance Defending Freedom’s pamphlet, “Protecting Your Ministry from Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Lawsuits”. Its 44 pages are written from the perspective that “sexual liberty trumps religious freedom” and that the American Bar Association’s Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity has designed ordinances that protect “homosexual and transgender ideology” in order to “legally compel Christians to accept, endorse and even promote” the ideology.
In short, it claims that activists are “maneuvering” to legally force churches to abandon Biblical teachings, and it attempts to prepare churches and religious schools for legal battles that could arise when beliefs conflict with the law.
“I’ve heard stories about janitors in churches who end up being the only person there when somebody comes in at night, looking for help. And that janitor ends up being the minister and the extension of that church to that person,” Blackholm said. “I think it’s exceedingly inappropriate for the government to tell a church, ‘well, that’s not really a religious job, that’s not really a religious job. We’re going to manage the various roles in your church and tell you which ones are religious and which one’s aren’t.’ That is government meddling where the first amendment exists to prevent.”
“In order to be employed by a church, you must conduct yourself in a way that is consistent with the church’s faith,” he said. “That is not unreasonable.”
That can start with a statement of faith, as recommended by the workshop.
“The church should clarify how [an] employee is connected to their overall mission as a church and that employee should sign their understanding what the conditions of this employment and how their conduct and what they are expected to behave and they can’t make decisions and engage in a lifestyle that is inconsistent with that church’s value system and expect to retain their employment,” Blackholm said.
But on Monday, Ross challenged Blackholm’s perspective, questioning what is faith-based about being an accountant, for example. Numbers are numbers, Ross said.
What would God do to a person or a church that employed a transgendered janitor, Ross asked.
“Absolutely nothing, and I think reasonable minds disagree on those things,” Blackholm answered. “But the point is, should the government be forced to compel one side of that debate on the entire country? That’s what we object to.”
Risky business
Blackholm didn’t just address churches, but also businesses, that he said are threatened by the law. He points to examples such as Arlene’s Flowers, a Richland business. It’s owner, Barronelle Stutzman, turned away a client because they requested flowers for a gay wedding.
“What she did is decline to be part of a certain event,” Blackholm said. “If ISIS or the Black Panthers come to our shop and say ‘Hey, we want you to work for our little event,” and we say ‘no,’ we should have the right to do so. And we shouldn’t face discrimination accusations because they are either Muslim or black — we don’t like what they do. We don’t want to be part of that specific event.”
“Happy to serve black people, happy to serve Muslims,” he said. “That’s exactly what happened in this case. Happy to serve gay people, but that is an event she is uncomfortable being a part of. She should have the right to say ‘no.'”
But what about situations where a grocery store decides it will refuse to sell to gay customers because owners believe that homosexuality conflicts with their religion? Ross could not see the difference between any business discriminating against gay customers, claiming religion as an excuse.
“Nobody discriminates against gay people because they are gay,” Blackholm responded. “These are events that they don’t want to be a part of.”
“The reality is that we have entire industries that have been closed off to people because they hold a certain position. That is un-American,” he said. “The government is the one that is changing, the people are not the ones that are changing. The government is becoming increasingly intolerant of people who do not share a specific position about marriage and sexuality and gender. That is a problem.”
Not just the government, but a particular leaning amid America’s political spectrum.
“The left. They were the biggest defenders of the idea, ‘I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to your death your right to say it,'” Blackholm said. “Now they are the ones trying to control every market-place decision so that no one is illegally mean.”
“The church is not going to change on this,” Blackholm told Ross, who noted that there are a variety of churches that sanctify gay marriages.
“But the church is not going to change,” Blackholm said.
He argued that there are plenty of photographers, florists, bakers and other businesses that will cater to gay weddings and there is no need to target those with anti-gay beliefs.
“We are not necessarily calling for the repeal of the non-discrimination law,” he said. “What we are asking for, and what all these cases are about, is the freedom to say ‘that is an event I am not comfortable being a part of.'”
And if a conflict arises between client and business owner, Blackholm asks for tolerance.
“The tolerant thing to do is just say, ‘Hey, I disagree with you. I think you should come and be surprised at how awesome we are and how fun this is going to be, but if that’s the way you feel, I’m going to find someone else. I’m not going to try to destroy your life or business,'” he said.