Freedom To Marry- posted on Tom Paine by Rev Gaddy

he covered this last sunday on Satte of Belief on AAR.
the podcast is up now at www.stateofbelief.

Freedom To Marry
Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy
June 05, 2006



Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy is the president of The Interfaith Alliance , the national non-partisan advocacy voice of the interfaith movement. Rev. Gaddy is a member of Clergy For Fairness, an organization of clergy members and religious leaders who strongly oppose any attempt to write discrimination into the United States Constitution.

The future of same-sex marriage and the voice of the conservative right will clash this week on the floor of the U.S. Senate in a game of election year politics. This week, the Federal Marriage Amendment goes to the Senate floor for debate and a vote. In response, the radical religious right deemed yesterday, June 4, Protect Marriage Sunday.

I am a huge advocate for the protection of marriage, but it appears I have a different idea than the radical religious right and some senators about what such "protection" involves. For instance, when I visited the website of the Religious Coalition for Marriage to see what their plan is to help protect marriage, all I found was information demanding that senators vote for the FMA. The amendment demands debate—raising as it does issues of civil rights, human dignity, and the relationship between houses of worship and the government in formalizing weddings. But that aside, the campaign to mobilize a political movement should not be confused with efforts to strengthen marriages, which is a worthy spiritual enterprise.

The FMA would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Therefore thousands, if not millions, of couples will be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation.

The FMA discriminates not only against people who want to be married, but also against the faith traditions that deem same-gender marriage to be consistent with their religious creed. America’s rich religious diversity has resulted in a proportionally diverse approach to marriage among our various faith traditions. These faith traditions should have the freedom to consecrate marriages on whatever theological grounds they choose.

I have joined with a group of religious leaders from various faith traditions ranging from mainline Christian to Jewish and Sikh to bring this issue to the forefront. By passing the FMA, Congress is taking away our religious liberty and when one American’s religious liberty is violated, all Americans’ religious liberty is in jeopardy.

We cannot tolerate discrimination being written into the Constitution. So, for those people who want to protect marriage, let me offer a few suggestions: start by raising the public’s consciousness of the dignity and importance of women in our still deeply patriarchal society; increase the minimum wage and offer tax breaks to the working poor so that spouses can see each other for quality lengths of time, rather than briefly passing on their way to two jobs; encourage family planning; start a plan to deal with domestic violence; and work to cover mental health care in medical insurance policies so serious emotional difficulties can be prevented from tearing marriages apart.

These are real world actions to deal with the real world problem of protecting marriage. All Americans who value the institution of marriage should unite on the above-listed goals to truly strengthen our communities and our country.

Freedom and equality are prerequisites for religious liberty to flourish in our nation. Yet, too often they are cast aside to advance one group’s view of the world. The Constitution is not a party platform, but rather a liberating document that provides all Americans guaranteed rights and freedoms.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/06/05/freedom_to_marry.php