Attorney Kim Colby, director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom of the Christian Legal Society, discussing religious liberty challenges posed by the Supreme Court’s same sex marriage decision.

<p>Attorney Kim Colby, director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom of the Christian Legal Society, discussing religious liberty challenges posed by the Supreme Court’s same sex marriage decision.</p>

<p>Free sharing permitted under the Creative Commons <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/">BY-NC-ND 3.0 (US)</a> license.</p>

Church State Council

Alan Reinach

Same Sex Marriage: Now What?

A sweet land of liberty. Our founding fathers not only pledged, but gave their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to obtain our God-given liberty. Now it's our turn. Liberty can only thrive if it's alive in the hearts of a freedom loving people. I'm Dan Matthews and I'm pleased to welcome you to Freedom's Ring. Here's our host and constitutional lawyer, minister Alan Re. Well, we've all heard a lot about the Supreme Court decision regarding same-sex marriage, and you may have even heard some things about how this would impact religious freedom. But that's the discussion we're gonna have today with an expert in the area I'm welcoming. Back to Freedom's Ring. Kim Colby, the Director of the Christian Legal Society Center for Law and Religious Liberty. Kim, thanks for being with us for this very important topic. It's my pleasure, Alan. And you know, I recall you've been, you've been at this even longer than I have, but I, you know, you don't ask a woman or age, so I'm not gonna tell our listeners just how many decades or years you've been doing this, but you know, you're In a, well, I appreciate That you're in a position, you know, having been through religious liberty battles now for, for quite some time to, to have an educated view of where the challenges are gonna come. Now that same-sex marriage is recognized throughout the nation. How does this impact those who are dissenters, who are non-conformists, who still believe that marriage properly is between a man and a woman, and that's part of their faith, part of their religious heritage? And not only individuals, but institutions, Christian colleges or universities or other types of social service agencies, even churches. Is there a threat to churches who don't change their beliefs? Where do you, as a religious liberty advocate see some of the challenges in the coming years? Well, I think you've named several of the places that will see challenges. I mean, we've already seen challenges in the small for-profit businesses where the florist doesn't want to provide flowers for the same sex ceremony, or the photographer does not want to take photos of the ceremony, where basically people involved in the wedding business want to be able to opt out. And so far they've had a really rough time in the state human rights commissions. But most of those cases, all but one, are still making their way through the state courts. But the real place that I'm concerned about is I think churches need to take some practical steps to protect themselves. There's no absolute way to protect an institution entirely from a lawsuit or even mostly, but there are some smart things they can do. The, the institution I'm most concerned about are the religious schools and colleges. Well just, yeah. Explain where you see the challenges to religious colleges or, or high schools and elementary schools. Right. Well, we saw two of them raised during the oral argument in April of this year in the Ober Gael case, the same-sex marriage case. And during oral argument, chief Justice Roberts asked the United States' Attorney Solicitor General Vareli, how a decision in favor of same-sex marriage would implicate the religious liberty for colleges that have housing policies that restrict their married housing to couples that are married as a matter of the college's religious beliefs, not as a matter of state law. And the solicitor General basically tried to sidestep that question. I don't think he did it very well. And so I think that is going to be one place where we see lawsuits brought. The other place, of course, which got a lot of attention was when Justice Alito asked Solicitor General Vareli about tax exempt status being taken away from religious colleges if they, if they quote unquote, discriminate on the basis of same sex marriage. And there the solicitor general was actually more forthright than I thought he would be. And he said, yes, it's, it could be an issue. So those are two the concerns. So tax tax exemption is a very kind of alarming issue for many. I think it bears a little closer scrutiny on our part first to remind listeners that I think going back to a 1972 Supreme Court decision, the Supreme Court held that real property tax exemption of churches was not constitutionally mandated, but permissible case out of my home state, the great state of New York. So we think, you know, we take for granted that we have a right to property tax exemption, but in fact, the court said no, it's not a matter of Right. It's permissible but not required. Right. That's my recollection of Wal. Yes. And, and so, but if you think about it, are we more at risk in blue states than red states to have states go after the tax exemption of, of conservative churches? Yes, I think so. Now, I don't want to be alarmist either. And yesterday the I r s commissioner in response to a question from Senator Lee at a hearing said that at least for the next two and a half years, nothing would be done about religious colleges tax exempt status. So that's good news. What was the basis of two and a half years? I, I've asked some people, and I don't know, I just assume that's his term in office. I See. But I don't know that I, I've been asking around, but, but I think to your point, yes, there's federal tax exemption, but there's state and local as well. And I think it was last year that the state of California, one of the houses passed a bill that would have denied tax exempt status in a narrow range of, I it was some sort of youth tax to the Boy Scouts. Yeah. We, we were opposed to that. Right. It, it had to do with high school intramural sports. It wa it was kind of a shot across the bow just to raise the whole issue was kind of bizarre, a bizarre bill and it, it ultimately didn't make it. But no, we know that the issue of tax is on everybody's mind, both left, right, and center. Right. So we know we're gonna find challenges and, and you know, it may seem unlikely with a Republican dominated Congress to see tax protections rolled back at the federal level, but my chief concern is at the state level, right, where you would have states willing to penalize churches, not only religious colleges, but churches themselves. What about things like the students at, besides the issue of married student housing, which I think, I mean, a a college could just say, okay, well we'll get out of the business of providing married student housing and sell those units to a private landowner and do something else with them. But what about eligibility for grants if the students at these colleges can't get the, the government guaranteed loans and get in California, we have Cal Grant nationally, we have the Pell Grant, that would be a huge hit to colleges. Right. And there's actually, Senator Lee of Utah has introduced a bill called the First Amendment Defense Act. I think he introduced it a couple of weeks ago that would try to protect religious institutions and persons from any sort of retaliatory action by the federal government based on their belief in marriage between a man and a woman. So that's good. What I've been trying to tell schools and colleges just generally in churches is, you know, this is a time to do what we all should have been doing years ago, just as good risk management practices. And that is to make sure that we, our, our institutions have adopted really sound theological statements of belief about marriage, sexuality, gender identity, about how Christians resolve disputes, that we don't go to court. And then also about who makes the decisions within our religious institutions as to how the religious doctrine applies. And once a, an institution works out those three basic theological statements, then they should weave those statements throughout their employment documents, their student admission documents, their members, covenants, facilities, use agreements, and, and in throughout their policies, that's one step they should be taking with the help of legal counsel who are familiar with their state and local laws. Sure. That makes good sense. What about other types of religious institutions besides colleges, universities, and, and other schools? Do you see potential for impact on social service organizations? On healthcare? Yes. So we're already, we've already seen with the executive order of last summer and the application of, of marriage at the federal level language working its way into some, not many yet, but some federal contracts of course, and then federal grant language that is basically trying to tell these religious nonprofits that provide good social services to all who need them, that somehow these, these religious nonprofits have to hold the view that, you know, there's, there is no difference between marriage between a man and a woman, and marriage between two people is the same gender. And so far it's really a stretch in applying that to grants. But of course, the executive order applied to contracts. And so a few faith-based organizations are already starting to grapple with that issue. So it sounds kind of like a loyalty oath where the, the government says, if you don't sign a statement saying that you'll comply with the non-discrimination policies, that you can't be eligible for the contract. Right. Typically, for example, Loma Linda University and Medical Center, which is a, a large seventh Day Adventist institution, they've done a lot of business with both the state and the federal government for a very innovative healthcare research. And you know, they insist in all their contracts that their right to operate as a Christian institution is respected. Right. But I think increasingly they're going to lose those contracts. Well, one thing, you know, the line that I think we're hoping to persuade the government to draw is between requiring that Christian groups provide services to all eligible beneficiaries that, you know, Christian groups want to serve everyone. Correct. So that's a line we could live with or a requirement I think most Christian groups could live with. If the government says, oh, and also you can't quote unquote discriminate in your hiring, then that becomes a different line. Of course. Exactly. Because most faith-based organizations require that their employees comply with their religious beliefs regarding various kinds of conduct. Well, and the whole purpose of a religious organization is to live out the values of the faith in society, in Christian service. And so in order to do that, the people who are employed have to be living that faith. Exactly. Well, we've been talking about the implications of the Supreme Court's decision on same sex marriage with Kim Colby, executive director of the Christian Legal Society Center for Law and Religious Freedom. This is not an issue that's gonna go away. I'm sure we'll have many more such conversations in the future. Kim, thank you so much for being with us on Freedom's Ring today. Thank you, Alan, for all you do for religious liberty And you as well the listeners. Don't forget, freedom is not free. Be informed, get involved. Join the North American Religious Liberty Association today. Producer of Freedom's, ring on the web@religiousliberty.info. This has been Freedom's Ring. I'm your host, Allen Rek. Until next week, let Freedom Ring.

Back to Menu

Same Sex Marriage: Now What?

Description

Sponsor

Recorded

Sound Doctrine