I wrote an article about this for Gather entitled The Right to Not Work. The ensuing comment thread is one of the most interesting that I have seen on Gather.
Since then, that issue seems to have disappeared from the public eye, but a few days ago, the California Supreme Court ruled that the same-sex marriage ban passed by California Proposition 22 back in 2000 is unconstitutional. Overjoyed gays are once more planning to marry, including many who saw their marriages annulled by the Proposition back in 2000.
The Religious Right is not taking this lying down! An article in the Los Angeles times reported that officials in the city of San Diego are planning to allow employees who have moral or religious objections to refuse to perform civil marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples.
Adding fuel to the fire, another LA Times article reported that the California Supreme Court is about to rule in a suit against doctors (once again in San Diego county…what's wrong with those people down there?) who refuse to perform certain procedures on gay patients because it would violate their religious beliefs. In this case, a gay woman brought suit against two Christian physicians who refused to perform an intrauterine insemination procedure. The justification for this refusal is not clear…whether it is because they believe gays should not be parents, or whether they disapprove of children born outside marriage. In either case, the recent ruling by the Court which makes gay marriage legal should remove any legal basis for their concerns. But will they perform the procedures? Not if they decide that their religious beliefs supersede California law.
The basic question is: When can a businessman or an employee refuse to provide a service that is part of their normal activities? Extensive legal precedent has established that it is illegal to refuse service on racial or ethnic grounds, but discrimination against gays is a religious issue, so there is a conflict between the rights of a person to practice their religion, and the rights of a person to be treated like any other person.
The general position of most religions in the United States is that government laws trump religious tenets. Some Christian fundamentalists (Dominionists) disagree. They believe that all laws should be based on Scripture. They favor abolishing the Constitution and replacing it with "Biblical Law." Fortunately, they represent a very small segment of the vast array of Christian faiths in this country. Most Christians are probably horrified by such ideas. The United States would be a much different place if these people had their way. Some liken their views to the Taliban, a fanatical sect of Islam, whose cruel and intolerant practices go back to the Middle Ages. A Christian theocracy would not be a pleasant place for a non-Christian, or even a moderate Christian. Fanatical faith of any stripe has a common characteristic: Intolerance of any differing beliefs, and a self-righteous obsession with imposing their beliefs on everyone else.
But most Christians would agree that if the law says gays can marry, then they should be treated like any other married (or about to be married) couple by city employees or doctors or anyone else. When people put their religious beliefs up against the Rule of Law, only chaos can result.
In the city employees' case, this is especially clear. They are employees hired to do a job. If they refuse to do that job, they should be fired. Actually, before they were fired, most reasonable people would either: a) quit, and find a job that doesn't conflict with their beliefs or b) agree to tolerate the beliefs of others, instead of trying to impose their own beliefs on everybody. What these people seem to be missing is the basic principle of religious freedom, which is spelled out in great detail in the Constitution. But in order for religious freedom to work, people must have tolerance for conflicting beliefs. I can believe whatever my religion dictates, but if others believe differently, that does not challenge or undermine my beliefs. Sadly, the more devoutly a person practices his/her religion the less likely they are to practice tolerance. The actions of Christian pharmacists, doctors and city employees are convincing evidence of this.
But a silver lining lurks in the center of every dark cloud. In this case, it might even be a gold lining. A great business opportunity is being missed here. The first rule of business is to find a need…and fill it. There is an obvious need for career counselors to help people who need an income from a job, but don't really want to work to earn it. I gave a few examples in my previous article linked above, but here is an expanded list of jobs that would require absolutely no effort if proposed rules like those in San Diego take effect:
Faith Career Opportunities
Mormon Starbucks, liquor stores
Vegan steak houses, meat packing plants
Jew pork and shellfish processing plants, cheeseburger specialty restaurants
Muslim Hog farms, football makers, liquor stores
If rules like those proposed in San Diego become widespread around the country, none of the people practicing the above faiths would have to lift a finger if they worked for these businesses, and they would be immune from layoff! I was ready to take the plunge and start a career placement service based on these ideas. And then I had a horrifying thought: What if somebody formed a church based on the principle that work…any work…is immoral?
Poof! Just like that I'm outta business.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 21
for your rumination: a businessperson can refuse to do their job when they're willing to LOSE it. -i, for one, couldn't assist any more hostile ignorants. therefore: in the middle of my shift, i hung up my earphones... and walked out of tele-services forever. (how people validate cussing out Help Desks is BEYOND me--honestly, i couldn't stand it during my teleMARKETING stint...even if i could UNDERstand it. -that's why you get so many call-backs, lads an' ladies: i've watched co-workers disposition you for them.
right after you called them ev'ry name in the book.
or were rude enough to, say, hang up in their face.
as if it was THEIR fault they were calling you.
breathe, Thomas.
breathe...)
i hate to tell you this but there is a long established career for people who like to pick up a wage but don't want to do any work to earn it.
They are called civil servants in Britain, I don't know if its the same over there but you will find a million or so such people working as clerks and administrators in government departments.
The irony is these people would expend less effort by doing the job they are paid for than they do in finding reasons for not doing it. :-)
You pose an interesting question here. Should a civil servant be allowed to refuse to marry gay and lesbian couples? Of course, I say, "No." My reason isn't just that I'm close to the issue. It is that the party never stops as you say about the vegan or the Muslim. If it is all right with one group, it has to be all right with all groups. Gays and lesbians are small in numbers. Remember that our system runs by the will of the majority while always protecting the rights of the minority.
I agree with you about discrimination...it is a legal issue, but Christian fundamentalists don't care about legality. They only care about the Bible. So whether we like it or not, it IS a religious issue with them. To me, there is no "issue." They are wrong, and as I said, if they don't like the job, they should quit, instead of trying to change the job to suit their personal whims.
Donald,
Religions are by their very nature "historically isolated." Most of them are based on ancient texts and traditions, and their belief systems are based on unchanging, rigid rules of behavior. They consciously and deliberately resist any pressure to change and adapt to the modern world, calling such efforts "moral relativism." A perfect example of this is the Catholic Church's intrasigence on the subject of contraception. In a world already grossly overpopulated, such a position is egregiously irresponsible. I see no evidence on the part of many (not all) religions to undergo a "period of adjustment."
Ian,
Yes, I am sure we have our share of do-nothing bureaucrats too. But at least they are avoiding work out of pure sloth, and not self-righteously following the tenets of some primitive superstition. I do not feel as threatened by laziness as I do by religious tyranny.
My Gosh, why don't we just have everyone with some sort of pedjudice they want to blame on God or Jesus Christ or Allah or Mohammed, wear a different colored hat. So if you went into the pharmacy for birth control pills don't ask a man or woman with a purple hat cuz they think you're going to hell and they don't want to help you.
Likewise if a doctor has a purple sign on the front of his building, don't make an appointment if your are gay or Lesbian or unmarried or might need an abortion or artificial insemination.
Please! This is the very reason for keeping church and state separated. In this country we are free to worship but not to force our tenants on someone else or to deny someone health care or whatever else doesn't fit into your man-made religion.
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's. ~ Jesus Christ
BTW, Bert. While some are Vegans due to religious conviction, vegan itself is not a religion but rather a dietary attitude. So "faith" is an incorrect heading. Vegan eating has been adopted by some religions, foremost might be Seventh Day Adventists.
Great and thoughtful article.
Ian: Perhaps in England but I have worked for many years as a civil servant in this country and in private industry for many years also. I can assure you that here the civil servants are just as hard working, if not more so, than those in private practice and just as capable. Those that are perhaps an exception are usually those who get where they are by political appointment and kissing the posterior of others, just as it is in private industry.
We were talking about this earlier, Sandy. I still see those signs occasionally, but if I walked into your restaurant and you refused to serve me, you better have a pretty darn good reason and it better have nothing to do with race or ethnicity...or I think you will get sued big time!
Workers in the power industry are not civil servants. Here they are usually termed power workers. At the breakup of the old Central Electricity Generating board in the 1980s I headed up three big Information technology products so the three sectors could be solf off. The job included putting control systems online, so I do appreciate what you did but would class you as an engineer.
There's an element here of the poor me-ism we see in the Christian claims that they're being silenced and discriminated against because someone wouldn't let them proselytize somewhere. "You're making me marry gay people? That's discrimination against my religion."
"You won't let me teach Christianity in my Science class? Discrimination!
It's been a longtime strategy of the Religious Right. They try to inject religion into public schools and government, and then scream "discrimination" when people point to the Article 1 of the Constitution.