tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/gay-marriage-1996/articlesGay marriage – The Conversation2023-09-25T12:22:42Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2122412023-09-25T12:22:42Z2023-09-25T12:22:42ZThe Supreme Court’s originalists have taken over − here’s how they interpret the Constitution<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549678/original/file-20230921-23-u7gnp7.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C0%2C5973%2C3997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Justices who follow originalism dominate in the U.S. Supreme Court.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-us-supreme-court-in-washington-dc-on-april-19-2023-the-news-photo/1251982729?adppopup=true">Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Today a majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices are either <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/roe-overturned-alito-dobbs-originalism/670561/">self-described originalists or strongly lean toward originalism</a>. Yet less than 50 years ago, originalism was considered a <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/06/12/how-a-fringe-legal-theory-became-a-threat-to-democracy">fringe movement</a>, hardly taken seriously by most legal scholars. </p>
<p>So, what is originalism, and why is it so influential today? </p>
<p>Originalism is the theory that judges are bound to interpret the Constitution as it would have been interpreted in the historical era when it was written. Understood this way, originalism is the idea that <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/live-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-confirmation/2020/10/13/923215778/barrett-an-originalist-says-meaning-of-constitution-doesn-t-change-over-time">judges must follow the law as written</a> and not merely ignore it or reinterpret it to their liking.</p>
<p>Why, then, aren’t all judges and legal scholars originalists? </p>
<h2>How to read a constitution</h2>
<p>There is no real controversy among judges or politicians about many provisions of the Constitution, for example that the president must be <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section1">at least 35 years old</a> or that <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section3">each state gets exactly two senators</a>. </p>
<p>But the challenge arises with certain passages in the Constitution – for example, the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment">Fifth Amendment guarantee of “due process</a>,” that is, the right to some sort of legal procedure when the government attempts to deprive someone of “life, liberty or property,” or the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv">14th Amendment’s principle of “equal protection of the laws.”</a> </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Nine people in black robes, sitting in two rows against a red curtain." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549680/original/file-20230921-22-5bv19h.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A majority of these justices embrace originalism to a greater or lesser degree.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/justices-of-the-us-supreme-court-pose-for-their-official-news-photo/1243793662?adppopup=true">AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What these have in common is that they are written in vague, open-ended language, with no concrete guidance for interpreting the law. Few if any people would deny that all Americans are entitled to the equal protection of the law. But what exactly does that mean?</p>
<p>Does a law providing for marriage only between a man and a woman violate equal protection, because it <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556">excludes gay marriages</a>? Does a law that prohibits bigamy violate equal protection, since it excludes plural marriages? How is a judge to decide, given the vagueness of the text?</p>
<p>It is here in these moments that the originalists and their critics part ways. </p>
<p>For the critics, the only way to interpret the abstract principles such as “due process” or “equal protection” is to look to the overall values and purpose of the Constitution as well as evolving societal values – after all, the very words “due” and “equal” are value terms. </p>
<p>When the Constitution was written, for example, only men were eligible for public office. Thus, the Constitution uses “he” 26 times, in reference to the president, vice president, citizens and others, and never uses “she.” Do these rules now apply only to males? </p>
<p>Of course not. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/constitution">When the Constitution was written</a>, it was assumed that the sexes had separate spheres. Men belonged in politics, women to the domestic sphere. When that fundamental value judgment shifted radically in the 20th century – as expressed in <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxix">the 19th Amendment giving women the vote</a> – it meant that the Constitution had to be read in a new way so that “he” is now interpreted as inclusive.</p>
<h2>Flexible originalism</h2>
<p>Now compare the equal protection clause and its application to sexual orientation.</p>
<p>For the originalist, the 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection was clearly not intended to protect gay rights, given that <a href="https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bowers_v._Hardwick">sodomy was a crime at the time</a>. For the non-originalist, societal values have changed radically on this issue, so they believe that now the Constitution should be read in a new way, such that equal protection extends to sexual orientation as well.</p>
<p>For the originalist, allowing such interpretive freedom is to abandon the Constitution altogether. </p>
<p>Yet, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=YLNOvJEAAAAJ&hl=en">as a scholar of law and philosophy</a>, I believe that flexible interpretation was the original intention of the framers. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A white haired man in 18th century dress - black coat and white shirt." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=901&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/549681/original/file-20230921-29-p28ft1.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1132&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Future President James Madison wrote that laws may not have a determinate meaning until they are tested by experience.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/JAMESMADISON/16a5bb98eee6da11af9f0014c2589dfb/photo?Query=James%20Madison%20president&mediaType=photo&sortBy=&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=701&currentItemNo=0&vs=true">AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>James Madison, for example, wrote in <a href="https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-31-40#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493391">Federalist 37</a> – part of <a href="https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text">a collection of essays</a> by Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay endorsing adoption of the Constitution – that all new laws will always be “more or less obscure and equivocal, until their meaning be liquidated and ascertained by a series of particular discussions and adjudications.” </p>
<p>That is, the meaning of these phrases are not fixed at the time of the passage of the Constitution. That meaning is only “liquidated,” that is, made determinate, in light of future experience involving debate that Madison called “particular discussions” and judicial decisions that he called “adjudications.” </p>
<p>Laws, for Madison, may not have a determinate meaning until they are tested by experience: Just what level of process is “due,” and what does “equality” require? </p>
<p>Hence, in Madison’s view, faithfulness to the original understanding actually requires that laws be interpreted in light of changing values and new circumstances. Principles in the Constitution like “due process” and “equal protection” were deliberately left vague and open-ended precisely so they could evolve in the future. </p>
<p>Ironically, I believe, it is the non-originalists who can claim to be the true originalists. </p>
<p>Why then is originalism so influential? The answer is that the <a href="https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/162099">movement arose in the 1970s and 1980s among conservatives</a>, in response to the liberal decisions of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren. Originalism began not as a neutral theory of interpretation but as a <a href="https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1499&context=faculty_publications">rallying cry for conservatives</a>. It is no surprise that the originalists on today’s Supreme Court are also the conservatives.</p>
<p>The central and plausible core of originalism is the idea that judges should not impose their own personal values on the Constitution. But the real debate, I believe, is not about originalism versus the freedom to ignore the Constitution, but rather it is about just what the true, original meaning of the Constitution is.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212241/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Whitley R.P. Kaufman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Only 50 years ago, originalism was considered a fringe movement, hardly taken seriously. Now its adherents dominate the Supreme Court.Whitley R.P. Kaufman, Professor of Philosophy, UMass LowellLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2096292023-07-17T11:38:29Z2023-07-17T11:38:29ZThree powerful films about gay marriage to celebrate ten years of the Same-Sex Marriage Act<p>It’s now ten years since the UK passed <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/30/contents/enacted/data.htm">the Same-Sex Marriage Act</a>, which made <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06687/">same-sex marriage</a> legal in England and Wales. </p>
<p>Since then, there’s <a href="https://glaad.org/glaads-2021-2022-where-we-are-tv-report-lgbtq-representation-reaches-new-record-highs/">been an increase</a> in LGBT+ characters onscreen, especially in television. But in film, this representation often follows a particular kind of narrative. A person struggles with their sexuality, feels the need to hide it and the film explores the (often) painful act of coming out. </p>
<p>Frequently these films are more concerned with showing us the homophobia characters face, than the realities of queer relationships (see, or rather don’t see, 2015’s truly terrible <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/jul/30/jennys-wedding-lesbian-drama-katherine-heigl">Jenny’s Wedding</a>, for example). Alternatively, the idea of committed queer domesticity is <a href="https://www.filmelier.com/film/4410/marry-me-dude">played for laughs</a>.</p>
<p>As a researcher who focuses on identities – particularly queer and marginalised ones – in film and television, I’ve been watching film catch up with reality with interest. And thankfully there have been productions that get it right. Here are my picks for three films that offer powerful representations of same-sex marriage, ten years on from legalisation.</p>
<h2>Love is Strange (2014)</h2>
<p>This is a beautiful film, full of tender moments between its two leads. Ben (John Lithgow) and George (Alfred Molina) have been together for 30 years and decide to finally get married.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FY4fkcbSfKg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trailer for Love is Strange (2014).</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The opening scene of the wedding is gorgeously understated, giving us the sense of it being something the couple just hadn’t gotten around to doing yet. After the wedding, George loses his job and the couple are forced to live apart for financial reasons.</p>
<p>Rather than thinking of marriage as the beginning of a life together, the film sees it as a bonus – albeit one that causes issues. It doesn’t shy away from the adversity couples may face around gay marriage, but the commitment the two characters show to each other speaks to an unshakeable faith in love.</p>
<h2>Cloudburst (2011)</h2>
<p>Narratives of queerness in film and TV often focus on younger characters, so it is nice to see different experiences represented.</p>
<p>In Cloudburst, Stella (Olympia Dukakis) and Dotty (Brenda Fricker) are a lesbian couple living together in Maine. Dotty’s granddaughter (who believes the two are “just friends”) wants to move her into a nursing home as her health declines. What follows is a Thelma and Louise style trip that sees Stella take Dotty to Canada so they can be married.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/U89Xb9j6beo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trailer for Cloudburst (2011).</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As with Love is Strange, the small moments of tenderness in Cloudburst give us the sense of the years the two have spent together. There are comedic moments – at times potentially undermining the poignancy of the film – but the relationship between the two is very much front and centre.</p>
<p>Again, marriage is depicted as a bonus, not the hallmark of a committed relationship. Dotty had thought marriage was a “crock of shite” because she couldn’t have it, but finds herself wanting it now that it’s possible. Cloudburst may divide people with its ending, which I will not spoil, but the mission for marriage in the film is a joy to behold.</p>
<h2>The Kids Are Alright (2010)</h2>
<p>This film is a bit different in that it tackles both same-sex marriage and bisexuality, which isn’t often given explicit representation in queer film. It can also be seen as groundbreaking in that it is one of the first big budget films to feature a married gay couple.</p>
<p>Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore) are a married couple with two children. When their youngest, Laser (Josh Hutcherson), wants to find his biological father (Mark Ruffalo), things begin to get complicated. </p>
<p>What is good about this film is that it doesn’t position queer romance as either utopian, or something that results in tragedy – it’s just complicated. </p>
<p>Talking about the pressures on queer people in the modern era, <a href="https://www.proquest.com/docview/211571425/fulltextPDF/A7AC07E49AC04EF8PQ/1?accountid=8630">Heather Love</a>, a researcher in queer theory, argues: “In the era of gay normalisation, gays and lesbians not only have to be like everybody else (get married, raise kids, mow the grass, etc.), they have to look and feel good doing it.” The Kids Are Alright pushes back against this pressure. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RixlpHKfb6M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trailer for The Kids Are All Right (2010).</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Jules and Nic do not look and feel good the whole time. T he film shows the messiness of relationships and marriage, allowing for a more nuanced representation. The inclusion of children also gives a chance to explore queer domesticity and family.</p>
<p>In writing this list, I’ve given three different US films. This isn’t to say that there aren’t films from other countries that incorporate gay characters who are married, but these ones above are more prominent and offer better representation. </p>
<p>Many films about same-sex relationships are still looking backwards, contending with the confines of societal restrictions of the past, or reckoning with violence done against LGBTQ+ communities, or the AIDS crisis. All are important. But with marriage rates <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/marriagecohabitationandcivilpartnerships/bulletins/marriagesinenglandandwalesprovisional/2019">declining across the board</a>, it will be interesting to see what film reflects in the years to come.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536131/original/file-20230706-17-460x2d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight,
on Fridays. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/something-good-156">Sign up here</a>.</em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209629/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christina Wilkins does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The hard-won legal rights for LGBT+ people have slowly shifted some public perceptions and begun to filter through into the media around us.Christina Wilkins, Lecturer in Film and Creative Writing, University of BirminghamLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2070732023-07-01T00:03:38Z2023-07-01T00:03:38ZA business can decline service based on its beliefs, Supreme Court rules – but what will this look like in practice?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535089/original/file-20230630-15-48437j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C15%2C2108%2C1393&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Designing for all couples -- or declining?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/cyber-love-royalty-free-image/522854467?phrase=wedding+rings+computer&adppopup=true">DawidMarkiewicz/iStock via Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At issue in one of this year’s most highly anticipated Supreme Court cases, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf">303 Creative v. Elenis</a>, was what happens when someone’s free speech or beliefs conflict with others’ rights. Specifically, 303 Creative addressed whether a Colorado anti-discrimination law can require a designer who believes marriage is only between a man and a woman to create a wedding website for a same-sex couple.</p>
<p>Two years ago, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-3">affirmed that the answer was “yes</a>.”</p>
<p>But on June 30, 2023, a bitterly divided Supreme Court <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2022/21-476">reversed that judgment</a>, holding 6-3 that <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">the free speech clause of the First Amendment</a> prohibited state officials from requiring the designer to create a website that communicates a message with which she disagrees.</p>
<p>As <a href="https://udayton.edu/directory/education/eda/russo_charles.php">a professor of law</a> who pays particular attention to First Amendment issues involving freedom of religion and speech, I see the case highlighting tension between two competing fundamental interests – ones that clash routinely in 21st century America.</p>
<h2>Compelled speech?</h2>
<p>The underlying dispute involves graphic artist Lorie Smith, the founder and owner of a studio called <a href="https://303creative.com/about/">303 Creative</a>. According to court documents, Smith will work with clients of any sexual orientation. However, she will not create content that goes against her religious beliefs, such as “that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.”</p>
<p>Conflict arose when Smith challenged <a href="https://ccrd.colorado.gov/ccrd-home/regulatory-information">Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act</a>, under which it is discriminatory and illegal to refuse services to someone based on “disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin or ancestry.” </p>
<p>In 2016, Smith unsuccessfully sued the members of <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/21/colorado-lawsuit-says-law-promotes-same-sex-marriage/">the state’s Civil Rights Commission and Colorado’s attorney general</a>. She and her attorneys argued that creating a website counts as an act of speech, and so being required to prepare a same-sex wedding website would violate her First Amendment rights: The law would force her to speak, legally referred to as “compelled speech.”</p>
<p>Smith and her attorneys also claimed that requiring her to create a website would violate her First Amendment right to <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">the free exercise of religion</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-1">federal trial court</a> in Colorado rejected Smith’s attempt to block enforcement of the anti-discrimination law in 2019. When she appealed, a split <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-3">10th Circuit affirmed</a> that Smith could not refuse to create websites for same-sex weddings, even if it would have gone against her beliefs. Protecting diverse viewpoints, <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-3">in the court’s opinion</a>, was a “good in and of itself,” but combating discrimination “is, like individual autonomy, ‘essential’ to our democratic ideals.” </p>
<p>In <a href="https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-1413/19-1413-2021-07-26.pdf?ts=1627336853">a lengthy dissent</a>, the chief judge of the 10th Circuit focused on compelled speech. He criticized the panel for taking “the remarkable – and novel – stance that the government may force Ms. Smith to produce messages that violate her conscience.”</p>
<h2>SCOTUS speaks</h2>
<p>The Supreme Court agreed to hear Smith’s case but limited the issue to free speech, sidestepping the dispute over the free exercise of religion. The <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/21-00476qp.pdf">question before the court</a> was “whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A small crowd of people in coats walk cheerfully down the steps of a building with large pillars." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535090/original/file-20230630-37825-y2xpsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lorie Smith, center in pink, walks out of the Supreme Court on Dec. 5, 2022, after the high court heard oral arguments in her case.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/lorie-smith-a-christian-graphic-artist-and-website-designer-news-photo/1245399590?adppopup=true">Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch noted that “First Amendment protections belong to all, not just to speakers whose motives the government finds worthy.” </p>
<p>Gorsuch reviewed the Supreme Court’s cases protecting the rights of individuals not to express themselves. In 1943’s <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/319/624">West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette</a>, for example, the court declared that public officials could not compel students who were Jehovah’s Witnesses to salute the flag, because doing so violated their religious beliefs.</p>
<p>While noting the “vital role public accommodations laws play in realizing the civil rights of all Americans,” <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf">Gorsuch reasoned</a> that Colorado could not “force an individual to speak in ways that align with its views but defy her conscience about a matter of major significance.” </p>
<p>Further, Gorsuch harshly criticized the dissenting justices’ argument that Colorado’s law focused on business owners’ conduct, not speech, contending that the dissent sidesteps a key question: whether a state can “force someone who provides her own expressive services to abandon her conscience and speak its preferred message instead?”</p>
<p>Justice Sonia Sotomayor, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf">whose dissent was joined by Justice Elena Kagan and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson</a>, lamented the majority’s decision as a time when there is “backlash to the movement for liberty and equality for gender and sexual minorities.” </p>
<p>Sotomayor then argued that under Colorado’s anti-discrimination law, Smith’s “freedom of speech <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf">is not abridged</a> in any meaningful sense, factual or legal.” If Smith wants to “advocate the idea that same-sex marriage betrays God’s laws,” Sotomayor made it clear that she can. </p>
<p>Sotomayor went on to decry the ruling for symbolically “mark(ing) gays and lesbians for second-class status.” Denying services to same-sex couples “reminds LGBT people of a painful feeling that they know all too well,” she wrote. “There are some public places where they can be themselves, and some where they cannot.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Half a dozen somber-looking people stand at the front of a room during a press conference." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/535091/original/file-20230630-41655-70lubj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Religious leaders and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser hold a press conference in Denver following the Supreme Court’s decision in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/kurt-kaufman-ministerial-associate-at-first-baptist-church-news-photo/1373397545?adppopup=true">Hyoung Chang/The Denver Post via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Questions ahead</h2>
<p>To see how 303 Creative’s impact plays out, it is worth closely watching the parts of the U.S. with anti-discrimination statutes in place. As Justice Gorsuch noted, about half of all states have laws like Colorado’s that “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf">expressly prohibit discrimination</a> based on sexual orientation.” More specifically, <a href="https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws/public-accommodations">22 states, plus the Virgin Islands and Washington, D.C.</a>, offer various forms of protections for LGBTQ+ individuals – including retail stories, restaurants, parks, hotels, doctors’ offices and banks.</p>
<p>I believe 303 Creative presents a challenge for society to come to grips with the tension between two fundamental interests.</p>
<p>One is the Supreme Court’s affirmation of Smith’s key argument: that requiring her to prepare websites that go against her religious beliefs would violate her First Amendment right to freedom of speech.</p>
<p>The other is the interest of same-sex couples in hiring the services they wish – and simply to be treated equally in the eyes of the law, on par with any other potential customers.</p>
<p>Ensuring both freedom of speech and civil rights requires good-faith efforts at respect – and respect is a two-way street. However, exactly what this looks like will likely be the cause of more litigation to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207073/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles J. Russo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A designer opposed to same-sex marriage argued that a Colorado anti-discrimination law would effectively force her to speak against her beliefs.Charles J. Russo, Joseph Panzer Chair in Education in the School of Education and Health Sciences and Research Professor of Law, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1875842022-09-09T12:34:56Z2022-09-09T12:34:56ZSupreme Court to revisit LGBTQ rights – this time with a wedding website designer, not a baker<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483333/original/file-20220907-9395-6xdmsq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=22%2C6%2C2087%2C1400&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Same-sex wedding cakes wound up at the Supreme Court – now, it's wedding websites' turn.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/close-up-of-gay-men-holding-hands-in-dark-royalty-free-image/675593111?adppopup=true">S_nke Bullerdiek/EyeEm via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A simmering, difficult, and timely question returns to the Supreme Court on December 5, 2022: What happens when freedom of speech and civil rights collide?</p>
<p>The court took up similar questions four years ago in the famous “<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-supreme-courts-gay-wedding-cake-ruling-wont-resolve-religious-freedom-issues-97759">gay wedding cake” case</a>, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf">Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission</a>, about a baker who refused to provide services for a same-sex couple based on his religious beliefs. The justices ruled in his favor, but did so on narrow grounds, sidestepping the direct constitutional questions over freedom of religion and free speech.</p>
<p>Now, another case from Colorado about free speech and same-sex marriage has made its way to the court: <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/303-creative-llc-v-elenis/">303 Creative v. Elenis</a>. As <a href="https://udayton.edu/directory/education/eda/russo_charles.php">a professor of law and education</a> who pays particular attention to First Amendment issues, I see the case highlighting tension between two competing fundamental interests – interests that seem to clash routinely in 21st-century America.</p>
<p>On Aug. 30, 2022, for example, another <a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2022/08/31/federal-court-rules-chelsey-nelson-photography-vs-louisville-fairness-ordinance/65465495007/">similar case was decided</a>, this time in Kentucky. A <a href="https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/kentucky/kywdce/3:2019cv00851/114724/130/0.pdf?ts=1661949564&lctg=19997310">federal trial court</a> ruled in favor of a Louisville wedding photographer who sued over the city’s “Fairness Ordinance,” which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. She argued that the law violated her religious beliefs and right to free speech, and the court agreed, explaining that “the government may not force singers or writers or photographers to articulate messages they don’t support.” </p>
<h2>Freedom to speak – or stay silent</h2>
<p>Graphic artist Lorie Smith is the founder and owner of a studio called <a href="https://303creative.com/about/">303 Creative</a>. According to <a href="https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-1413/19-1413-2021-07-26.pdf?ts=1627336853">court documents</a>, Smith is generally willing to serve LGBTQ clients. However, she intends to begin designing wedding websites and is unwilling to create them for same-sex couples, saying it would go against her Christian beliefs.</p>
<p>Under <a href="https://ccrd.colorado.gov/regulatory-information">Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act</a>, though, it is discriminatory and illegal to refuse services to someone based on “disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.”</p>
<p>In 2016, Smith <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2016/09/21/colorado-lawsuit-says-law-promotes-same-sex-marriage/">sued the members of the state’s Civil Rights Commission and Colorado’s attorney general</a>. Smith argued that being required to prepare a same-sex wedding website would violate her <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">First Amendment</a> rights by forcing her to speak – what lawyers refer to as “compelled speech.”</p>
<p>The constitutional right to freedom of “speech” has historically been understood to cover a variety of ways people express themselves, including in writing, art and protest. But not only does it protect the right to protect one’s speech, it also safeguards <a href="https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/933/compelled-speech">the right to not speak in the first place</a>.</p>
<p>Through her attorneys, Smith also maintained that requiring her to create a website would violate her <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">First Amendment</a> right to the free exercise of religion.</p>
<h2>Path to SCOTUS</h2>
<p>The federal trial court in Colorado <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-1">rejected Smith’s request</a> to block the anti-discrimination law in 2019. When she appealed, <a href="https://casetext.com/case/303-creative-llc-v-elenis-3">the circuit court</a> agreed with the previous ruling: She could not refuse to create websites for same-sex weddings, even if it would have gone against her beliefs.</p>
<p>Protecting diverse viewpoints is “a good in and of itself,” the court wrote, but combating discrimination “is, like individual autonomy, ‘essential’ to our democratic ideals.”</p>
<p>In <a href="https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/19-1413/19-1413-2021-07-26.pdf?ts=1627336853">a lengthy dissent</a>, the chief judge highlighted Smith’s claim of compelled speech, criticizing the court for taking “the remarkable – and novel – stance that the government may force Ms. Smith to produce messages that violate her conscience.”</p>
<p>Smith appealed to the Supreme Court, which, in February 2022, agreed to hear her claim, limited to the issue of free speech, not freedom of religion. The question <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/21-00476qp.pdf">for the nine justices to decide</a> will be “whether applying a public-accommodation law to compel an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A man in a black shirt and a gray apron stands amid many-tiered wedding cakes in a green room." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/483336/original/file-20220907-2774-q9y5k0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jack Phillips, whose Masterpiece Cakeshop case went to the Supreme Court, stands in his Colorado bakery.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/jack-phillips-stands-for-a-portrait-near-a-display-of-news-photo/803122450?adppopup=true">Matthew Staver/For The Washington Post via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Key to the case?</h2>
<p>So, how will the justices rule? The Supreme Court may have given a clue to its initial attitude <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/21-00476qp.pdf">when it announced it would hear the case</a>. The justices zoomed in on a legal standard called “strict scrutiny,” as they did in its earlier case on this issue, Masterpiece Cakeshop.</p>
<p>Under <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/strict_scrutiny#:%7E:text=To%20pass%20strict%20scrutiny%2C%20the,the%20constitutionality%20of%20governmental%20discrimination.">strict scrutiny analysis</a>, the most stringent form of judicial review, government restrictions on fundamental rights must be justified by a compelling state interest in order to be upheld. In other words, the restrictions must advance government interests of the highest order, and be narrowly tailored to those goals – in this case, preventing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.</p>
<p>But the Supreme Court appeared skeptical that Colorado’s anti-discrimination act could survive this test, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/21-00476qp.pdf">writing</a>, “The Tenth Circuit applied strict scrutiny and astonishingly concluded that the government may, based on content and viewpoint, force Lorie to convey messages that violate her religious beliefs and restrict her from explaining her faith.”</p>
<p>When the Supreme Court applies strict scrutiny, it rarely upholds governmental restrictions on constitutional rights – which could suggest a win for Smith.</p>
<p>Another possible indication, again in favor of Smith, is in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-1466_2b3j.pdf">Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31</a>, a 2018 case from Illinois involving compelled speech. Here the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a nonunion public employee who challenged an Illinois law requiring him to pay fair share fees to the union representing his colleagues for costs associated with the bargaining process. The court agreed with the employee’s claim that because the union supported positions with which he disagreed, his having to pay the fees violated his First Amendment right as a form of compelled speech.</p>
<h2>A second chance</h2>
<p>On the other side of the controversy is the vital interest of same-sex couples and others in the LGBTQ community to live free from discrimination based on their sexual orientations. </p>
<p>In a 2019 case, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/17-1618">Bostock v. Clayton County</a>, the Supreme Court interpreted <a href="https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964">Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964</a>, a far-reaching employment statute, as extending protection against discrimination in the workplace to individuals who are gay and transgender. However, the Court has yet to address the clash of rights at issue in 303 Creative.</p>
<p>The key question, then, appears to be whether individuals can require artists or those who engage in expressive activities to provide their services if doing so can be viewed as a form of compelled speech, violating their right to stay silent on issues with which they disagree.</p>
<p>Thus, it remains to be seen whether 303 Creative will set a new precedent on balancing First Amendment freedoms while protecting others from discrimination. After all, it sidestepped constitutional issues <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-supreme-courts-gay-wedding-cake-ruling-wont-resolve-religious-freedom-issues-97759">in Masterpiece Cakeshop</a>. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-111_j4el.pdf">The court based its decision</a> in the baker’s favor on some of the Colorado commission members’ comments about his beliefs. The majority found that those comments violated the state’s First Amendment duty to maintain religious neutrality while avoiding hostility to faith-based beliefs or viewpoints.</p>
<p>On Oct. 18, 2022 <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2022.pdf">the Supreme Court announced</a> that it will hear oral arguments in 303 Creative on Dec. 5, 2022. Though the court likely will not render a judgment until near the end of its term in June 2023, it promises to be one of the upcoming year’s highest-profile judgments. And, regardless of the outcome, 303 Creative is likely to generate even more controversy.</p>
<p><em>Article updated on Oct. 20, 2022 to include the date of oral arguments in 303 Creative v. Elenis.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187584/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Charles J. Russo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>303 Creative v. Elenis gives SCOTUS another chance to set precedent about what happens when First Amendment freedoms come at a cost to civil rights.Charles J. Russo, Joseph Panzer Chair in Education in the School of Education and Health Sciences and Research Professor of Law, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1888932022-08-18T08:32:08Z2022-08-18T08:32:08ZBehind the split of the Anglican church in Australia over gay marriage<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479830/original/file-20220818-445-2n0zyw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C6%2C4594%2C3442&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">St. Andrew's Cronulla Anglican Church of Australia</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the opening address of this year’s <a href="https://www.gafconaustralia.org/">Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON) Australasia</a>, Bishop Richard Condie announced the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross. In Bishop Condie’s <a href="https://www.gafconaustralia.org/2022/08/15/an-anglican-lifeboat-for-faithful-christians/?fbclid=IwAR3FdBxmnqo7qwBaeZtwtTPWshMAoKedXF2HWdbkyrS9zwRbY4USiLr4nY4">words</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the Diocese of the Southern Cross is a new structure for Anglicans in Australia who can no longer sit under the authority of their bishop.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What lead to this rupture and what does it mean for the future of the Anglican Church in Australia?</p>
<h2>Anglicans in Australia</h2>
<p>Anglicans are the second largest Christian denomination in Australia, making up <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/people-and-communities/cultural-diversity-census/latest-release">9.8%</a> of the population. They suffered the greatest decline in numbers of any Christian denomination between the 2016 and 2021 census, <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/religious-affiliation-australia">losing 604,900 members</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/anglican-disunity-on-same-sex-marriage-threatens-to-tear-the-church-apart-182936">Anglican disunity on same-sex marriage threatens to tear the church apart</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Australian Anglican Church is divided into <a href="https://anglican.org.au/about-us/anglican-church-of-australia/">23 independent diocese</a> and is a part of the worldwide <a href="https://www.anglicancommunion.org/">Anglican Communion</a>. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://scd.org.au/">Diocese of the Southern Cross</a> is a <a href="https://adelaideguardian.com/2022/08/18/a-statement-on-the-launch-of-the-company-the-diocese-of-the-southern-cross/?fbclid=IwAR2I9WR4oyyZj70GYrfiCYY5yC2EqMKAv56110cLxAzRw9_FQYCGw9hV-9s">new religious denomination</a> that was first incorporated in September 2021, although it was not formally launched until this week. Its first bishop will be the former Anglican archbishop of Sydney, Glen Davies. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.gafconaustralia.org/2022/08/17/faq-on-diocese-of-the-southern-cross/?fbclid=IwAR2k9ISL0kJwgKtook-sUnWryAn063oZMMbFtABsABsgtVEJtne61XgTWx0">The new diocese describes itself</a> as a parallel Anglican structure following key Anglican documents such as the 39 articles, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal. However, it is not part of the Australian Anglican Church nor will it be part of the Anglican Communion. In other words, it is not the 24th diocese of the Anglican Church of Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/479819/original/file-20220818-22-ubh18b.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">St Mary’s Anglican Church in North Melbourne.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why has the Diocese of the Southern Cross been created?</h2>
<p>The reasons behind the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross are complex. On its web page, GAFCON Australia <a href="https://www.gafconaustralia.org/2022/08/15/an-anglican-lifeboat-for-faithful-christians/#:%7E:text=At%20the%20recent%20General%20Synod,of%20sexual%20ethics%20for%20leaders.">states</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>At the recent General Synod (the church’s triennial meeting), a majority of bishops were unable to uphold the Bible’s ancient teaching on marriage and sexual ethics.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, in his response to the announcement of the creation of the Diocese of the Southern Cross, the Primate of the Australian Anglican Church Archbishop Geoff Smith <a href="https://anglican.ink/2022/08/17/statement-from-the-primate-of-australia-on-the-diocese-of-the-southern-cross/">noted</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The meeting of the General Synod held in May this year clearly affirmed the view that marriage is between a man and a woman, and declined to affirm same sex marriage. It is perplexing therefore that the leaders of this breakaway movement cite the reason for this new denomination as the failure of General Synod to explicitly express an opinion against the blessing of same sex marriages.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In 2020, the Anglican Church’s <a href="https://anglican.org.au/governance/tribunals/appellate-tribunal-current-matters/">Appellate Tribunal</a> ruled that blessings of same-sex couples were permitted under church law. The Bishops of the church met in response to this ruling, and noted “with pain we recognise that there is not a common mind on these issues within the House of Bishops.” </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-the-anglican-church-about-to-split-it-is-facing-the-gravest-threat-to-its-unity-in-more-than-200-years-150365">Is the Anglican Church about to split? It is facing the gravest threat to its unity in more than 200 years</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The 2022 General Synod did not pass any resolutions specifically affirming that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, a resolution on <a href="https://anglican.org.au/the-general-synod/search-resolutions-of-gs-sessions/?sid=14186">Exemptions Clauses for Religious Bodies</a> included this statement that the Anglican Church:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Continues to affirm that marriage according to the rites and ceremonies of the Anglican Church of Australia is the voluntary union of one man and one woman arising from mutual promises of lifelong faithfulness. The doctrines, tenets, beliefs and teachings of our Church are expressed in the authorised liturgies of our church and there is currently no liturgy for the solemnisation of a same-sex marriage.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, the House of Bishops also voted against a <a href="https://anglican.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Statement-on-Marriage-110522.pdf">specific motion</a> “that sought to affirm that marriage is only between a man and a woman and the blessing of same sex marriages was not in accordance with the teaching of Christ.”</p>
<h2>What is the future of the Australian Anglican Church?</h2>
<p>While much has already been said about the split in the press and elsewhere, the future is very much unknown. Parallel Anglican organisations have previously been set up in other parts of the world including New Zealand, the United States and Canada with varying degrees of success. </p>
<p>The Diocese of the Southern Cross is not even the first parallel Anglican denomination to be set up in Australia. For example, the Anglican Catholic Church was established in 1987 and <a href="https://www.accopanz.org/">describes itself</a> as the “traditional Anglican Church in that we preserve the Historic Beliefs, Holy Tradition, Creeds, and Liturgies used by the Church in England prior to their latest reformation”. </p>
<p>Australian Anglicans are used to a church that does things a bit differently. For example, while the Anglican Diocese of Sydney will only ordain women as deacons, the Diocese of Perth is headed by Archbishop Kay Goldsworthy, one of the first women to be ordained to the Anglican priesthood in Australia. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-anglican-women-can-be-bishops-in-australia-but-not-england-11337">Why Anglican women can be bishops in Australia but not England</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>While things may be uncertain at the moment, the words of Archbishop Smith sum up the current position of the church well:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It is always easier to gather with those we agree with. But in a tragically divided world God’s call and therefore the church’s role includes showing how to live together with difference. Not merely showing tolerance but receiving the other as a gift from God.</p>
<p>My conviction is that the Anglican Church of Australia can find a way to stay together, graciously reflecting God’s great love, with our differences held sincerely. This week’s announcement makes achieving that end more difficult but not impossible.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188893/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Renae Barker is the Advocate of the Anglican Diocese of Bunbury and a member of General Synod. </span></em></p>A schism over gay marriage has led to a split in the Anglican church in Australia. Will it affect the church’s future?Renae Barker, Senior Lecturer, The University of Western AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1875092022-08-02T12:59:43Z2022-08-02T12:59:43ZCongress is considering making same-sex marriage federal law – a political scientist explains how this issue became less polarized over time<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476974/original/file-20220801-24-y51nxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A same-sex marriage supporter waves a rainbow flag outside the Supreme Court in 2015.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/samesex-marriage-supporter-vin-testa-of-washington-dc-waves-a-rainbow-picture-id471417652?s=2048x2048">Drew Angerer/Getty Images </a></span></figcaption></figure><p>While <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/how-abortion-became-divisive-issue-us-politics-2022-06-24/">public opinion</a> and <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws">different state laws</a> on abortion rights are sharply dividing the country, there’s growing indication that most people agree on another once-controversial topic – protecting same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>The U.S. House of Representatives voted on July 19, 2022, to <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404/text?r=1&s=1">enshrine same-sex marriage </a> into law with a bipartisan vote – all 220 Democratic representatives voted in favor, joined by 47 Republican colleagues. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404">Respect for Marriage Act</a>, as it is called, would repeal the 1996 <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defense_of_marriage_act_(doma)">Defense of Marriage Act,</a> a federal law that defines marriage as the legal union between a man and a woman.</p>
<p>The bill faces an <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republicans-split-sex-marriage-bill-faces-uncertainty-senate-rcna39574">uncertain fate</a> in the closely divided Senate – so far, five Republicans out of 50 have said they would vote for it. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer <a href="https://www.vox.com/23274491/senate-republicans-same-sex-marriage-bill-respect-for-marriage-act">has said</a> the Senate will vote on the bill once it has 10 Republican votes. </p>
<p><a href="https://academics.morris.umn.edu/tim-lindberg">I am a scholar</a> of political behavior and history in the U.S. I believe that it’s important to understand that the bipartisan support for this bill marks a significant political transformation on same-sex marriage, which was used as a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096505056295">contentious point</a> separating Democrats and Republicans roughly 15 to 20 years ago.</p>
<p>But over the past several years, same-sex marriage has become less politically divisive and gained more public approval, driven in part by former President Donald Trump’s general <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/16/republicans-gay-marriage-wars-505041">acceptance of the practice</a>. This environment made it politically safe for nearly a quarter of Republican House members to vote to protect this right under federal law. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Two men wearing suits stand with their backs to the camera and signs that say Just Married on their backs." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=445&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476967/original/file-20220801-24-s4g4yz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A same-sex couple are shown after they married at San Francisco City Hall in June 2008.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/samesex-couple-ariel-owens-and-his-spouse-joseph-barham-walk-arm-in-picture-id81601297?s=2048x2048">Justin Sullivan/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What makes opinions change?</h2>
<p>Seventy-one percent of Americans say they support legal same-sex marriage, according to a <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/393197/same-sex-marriage-support-inches-new-high.aspx">July 2022 Gallup poll</a>. In 1996, when Gallup first polled about same-sex marriage, 27% supported legalization of same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>This shift in public opinion has happened despite increasing polarization in the U.S. <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/12/17/in-a-politically-polarized-era-sharp-divides-in-both-partisan-coalitions/">about gun control, racial justice</a> and climate change.</p>
<p>What becomes, remains or ceases to be a divisive political issue in the U.S. over time depends on many factors. Changes to laws, shifting cultural norms and technological progress can all shape political controversies.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898030619000277">My research, for example, explores</a> how Mormons in Utah territory – what would later become Utah state – were denied statehood by Congress until they gave up their religious belief in polygamy. Polygamy was outlawed under U.S. law, and known polygamists were excluded from voting and holding office. In the 1880s, <a href="https://theconversation.com/explaining-polygamy-and-its-history-in-the-mormon-church-81384">an estimated 20% to 30%</a> of Mormons practiced polygamy. Yet, political pressure led the Mormon Church president in 1890 to <a href="https://theconversation.com/explaining-polygamy-and-its-history-in-the-mormon-church-81384">announce</a> that polygamy would no longer be sanctioned. </p>
<p>In 2011, <a href="https://www.deseret.com/2012/1/15/20244382/mormons-say-polygamy-morally-wrong-pew-poll-shows">86% of Mormon adults reported that they consider polygamy morally wrong</a>, nearly in line with <a href="https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/214601/moral-acceptance-polygamy-record-high-why.aspx">general public opinion</a>. </p>
<p>Many political leaders, both on the left and right, were also largely hostile to same-sex marriage <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/high-profile-politicians-changed-positions-gay-marriage/story?id=18740293">until the early 2010s.</a> </p>
<h2>A rising controversy</h2>
<p>In 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/05/31/issenberg-book-excerpt-bill-woods-honolulu-doma-491401">state must have a compelling reason to ban same-sex marriage</a>, after a gay male couple and two lesbian couples <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1993/05/07/us/in-hawaii-step-toward-legalized-gay-marriage.html">filed a suit</a> that a state ban on same-sex marriage violated their privacy and equal protection rights. </p>
<p>Concern among conservatives that this legal reasoning would lead the Supreme Court to acknowledge a right to same-sex marriage led to a <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/how-and-why-doma-became-law-1996-msna20387">Republican Senator and Congressman</a> introducing the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defense_of_marriage_act_(doma)">Defense of Marriage Act</a>.</p>
<p>President Bill Clinton signed the bill in 1996 after <a href="https://law.jrank.org/pages/6038/Defense-Marriage-Act-1996.html">342 – or 78% – of House members and 85 senators</a> voted for it. Polling at the time showed support among the general population for same-sex marriage was <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/210566/support-gay-marriage-edges-new-high.aspx">27% overall, including just 33% among Democrats</a>. </p>
<p>Seven years later, in 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Court struck down a <a href="http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/440/440mass309.html">state ban on same-sex marriage</a>. With a <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-matches-record-high.aspx">strong majority nationally of Republicans and independents opposed to same-sex marriage</a>, former President George W. Bush used conservative reactions to that decision to encourage voter turnout in 2004. <a href="https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/GAY-MARRIAGE-Did-issue-help-re-elect-Bush-2677003.php">Bush’s campaign highlighted state amendments to ban same-sex marriage</a>, all of which easily passed. </p>
<p>Although voters prioritized <a href="https://doi.org/10.2202/1540-8884.1056">other issues</a> in the 2004 elections, the opposition to same-sex marriage <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.2202/1540-8884.1058/html">helped Bush win reelection</a>, while Republicans picked up seats in both the House and Senate.</p>
<h2>A political change</h2>
<p>The legal and political landscape on same-sex marriage <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/06/24/same-sex-marriage-timeline/29173703/">became much more liberal</a> in the years following 2004. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/prop-8-passed-california-gay-marriage">In 2008,</a> state courts in California and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/nyregion/11marriage.html">Connecticut struck down</a> bans on same-sex marriage. <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gaymarriage-vermont/vermont-becomes-4th-u-s-state-to-allow-gay-marriage-idUSTRE53648V20090407">Vermont became</a> the first state in 2009 to pass legislation and legalize same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>A major national shift occurred in 2012 <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-biden-forced-hand-on-same-sex-marriage-but-alls-well/">when then-Vice President Joe Biden</a> and President Barack Obama openly supported same-sex marriage. This was a major change for both men. <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/22/politics/marriage-equality-congress-evolution/index.html">Biden had voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act</a>in 1996. <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/dissecting-president-obamas-evolution-gay-marriage/story?id=18792720">Obama publicly supported</a> marriage as being between a man and a woman in his 2004 senatorial campaign.</p>
<p>In 2015, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/14-556">struck down</a> all national and state restrictions on same-sex marriage, making same-sex marriage the law of the land.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The White House is shown at night, light up with rainbow colors." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476966/original/file-20220801-67954-kemfwv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rainbow-colored lights shine on the White House after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage in June 2015.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/rainbowcolored-lights-shine-on-the-white-house-to-celebrate-todays-us-picture-id478678270?s=2048x2048">Mark Wilson/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The Trump effect</h2>
<p>The lack of attention Trump paid to same-sex marriage is one factor that contributed to it becoming a less divisive issue. While Trump’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/24/absurb-claim-that-trump-is-most-pro-gay-president-american-history/">actual record on LBGTQ rights</a> generally aligns with conservative Christian values, Trump had said in 2016 that he was <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-same-sex-marriage-231310">“fine” with legalizing same-sex marriage</a>. </p>
<p>Still, despite the legality of same-sex marriage, many conservative Midwestern and Southern states <a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/state-maps">deny other legal protections</a> to LBGTQ persons. Twenty-nine states still allow licensed professionals to conduct youth gay-conversion therapy, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/07/health/conversion-therapy-personal-and-financial-harm/index.html">a discredited process to convert LGBTQ people into no longer being queer</a>. </p>
<p>More than 20 states allow discrimination in <a href="https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws">both housing</a> and public accommodations based on sexual orientation. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A woman holds up a sign that says 'every child deserves a mom and dad'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/476998/original/file-20220801-70473-f142qs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A woman participates in a protest in Washington after the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage in 2015.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/opponents-of-samesex-marriage-demonstrate-near-the-supreme-court-28-picture-id471432028?s=2048x2048">Drew Angerer/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Respect for marriage</h2>
<p>Some Republican leaders have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/22/us/politics/after-roe-republicans-sharpen-attacks-on-gay-and-transgender-rights.html">grown bolder </a>in their opposition to same-sex marriage since the Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to abortion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision. </p>
<p>Other Republicans have said that codifying federal law same-sex marriage is <a href="https://www.vox.com/23274491/senate-republicans-same-sex-marriage-bill-respect-for-marriage-act">not necessary</a> since they don’t believe the Supreme Court is likely to overturn federal protections for same-sex marriage. </p>
<p>Democrats first moved to protect same-sex marriage in federal law because Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion in the Dobbs case that the court <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/24/thomas-constitutional-rights-00042256">should reconsider,</a> “all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” the latter being the case that legalized same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>But despite public opinion polls showing that most people favor legalizing same-sex marriage – including <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-matches-record-high.aspx">nearly half</a> of Republicans – the issue could still be a liability for Republican politicians. They have to answer to their core conservative constituents who largely oppose the practice. <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3570528-same-sex-marriage-debate-poses-problems-for-republicans/">This could mean</a> that Senate Republicans may have to consider splitting from their own base, or stepping away from moderate voters.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187509/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tim Lindberg does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The U.S. House of Representatives recently voted for a bill that would federally protect same-sex marriage – and 47 Republicans signed on, too. Same-sex marriage isn’t the partisan issue it once was.Tim Lindberg, Assistant professor, political science , University of MinnesotaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1858232022-06-24T18:55:20Z2022-06-24T18:55:20Z‘A revolutionary ruling – and not just for abortion’: A Supreme Court scholar explains the impact of Dobbs<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470820/original/file-20220624-18-ycg9sl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=308%2C58%2C5251%2C3642&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Anti-abortion protestors celebrate the overturning of Roe v. Wade outside the US Supreme Court on June 24.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/antiabortion-campaigners-celebrate-outside-the-us-supreme-court-in-picture-id1241501255?s=2048x2048">Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images </a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The Supreme Court’s decision to reverse 50 years of constitutional protection for the right to get an abortion <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf">is more than 200 pages long</a>. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-aGQIZwAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Morgan Marietta</a>, a political scientist at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, and editor of the annual <a href="https://www.springer.com/series/16259">SCOTUS series</a> at Palgrave Macmillan, studies the ideas and ideology of the court. We asked him to illuminate the thinking that lies behind the momentous decision.</em></p>
<h2>What does this ruling mean?</h2>
<p>This is a revolutionary ruling. Not just for abortion, but for the ongoing debates over the nature of rights under the Constitution.</p>
<p>The ruling signals a massive change in how we read the Constitution, from <a href="https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/living-constitution">a living reading</a> to an <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/white-papers/on-originalism-in-constitutional-interpretation">original reading</a>. The court has firmly rejected the theory of the <a href="https://harvardlawreview.org/2007/05/the-living-constitution/">living Constitution</a>, which argues that the meaning of the document’s language changes as the beliefs and values of Americans change. </p>
<p>The living view, which prevailed at the Supreme Court during the second half of the 20th century, means that additional rights can emerge over time, including abortion, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/496">privacy</a> and <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556">same-sex marriage</a>. The living Constitution is updated through the judgment of the justices of the Supreme Court, who determine when public values have changed, and hence new rights have emerged.</p>
<p>Originalism, which is the approach taken by the justices who overruled Roe, rejects the living Constitution. <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-originalism-debunking-the-myths-148488">In the originalist view</a>, the Constitution is static until officially altered by amendment. It does not evolve on its own without public approval. The role of the justices is to determine the original public meaning of the text, but to leave other decisions to democratic representation through elections.</p>
<p>Regarding abortion, the conclusion of Dobbs is clear: “The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=87">people and their elected representatives</a>.” </p>
<p>“Arrogated” is an unusual word; <a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/arrogate">it means</a> to take without justification, implying that it is done in an arrogant way. That is the core argument of Dobbs: Roe was the court being arrogant, taking power the justices didn’t have, which rightly belongs with “the people,” a Revolutionary-era term in a revolutionary ruling. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A white, blond woman covers her face with her hand outside the US Supreme Court" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470823/original/file-20220624-23-sobwj6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An abortion rights supporter cries outside the Supreme Court on June 24, 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/prochoice-supporter-cries-outside-the-us-supreme-court-in-washington-picture-id1241501014?s=2048x2048">Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why is there now no right to abortion, when Roe recognized it?</h2>
<p>The new originalism of the court’s majority argues that if a right is present in the text and original public meaning of the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript">Constitution</a>, including the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript">Bill of Rights</a> and any other amendments, then the decision is beyond the reach of majority rule. But rights must be clear and established in order to wield that sort of influence. </p>
<p>The explicit rights clearly described and enumerated in the Bill of Rights — freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms and others — are rising in influence, specifically because they have been approved and ratified by the people. </p>
<p>But the other evolved or implicit rights that have been recognized by the court over time – abortion and <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/06/24/clarence-thomas-same-sex-marriage-contraception">gay marriage</a>, among others – are simply not constitutional rights in the view of the new majority. Enumerated rights – the ones specifically spelled out in the Bill of Rights – will be accorded stronger protections, while the recently recognized rights of the living Constitution will not be protected.</p>
<p>Under Roe, the majority saw abortion as within the category of rights. Hence it received constitutional protection. But under the new abortion decision, it should be governed by majority rule, the kind of question that is to be determined by the citizens of each state through their legislatures.</p>
<p>Even the originalist justices, however, recognize that there are some unenumerated rights which, though not spelled out in the Constitution, should be given constitutional protection. The <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/ninth_amendment">Ninth Amendment</a> explicitly argues for their existence: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”</p>
<p>So how do we know what those rights are? The court has settled on something known as the <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/521/702/">Glucksberg standard</a> from 1997: Americans hold those additional rights that are “deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition.” </p>
<p>In other words, if during the early phase of American history – roughly the 100-year period between the founding and the 14th Amendment, the 1770s to the 1870s – Americans publicly asserted the existence of a right, then it exists. But if they did not, then it does not exist. Under the Glucksberg standard, there has to be clear historical evidence from public debates, political speeches or judicial rulings that the right was asserted and recognized.</p>
<p>In Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in Dobbs, he provides a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-analysis-roe-wade.html">review of the history</a> of abortion: “The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973,” <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=33">Alito writes</a>.</p>
<p>In the future, the court may rely on its own reading of history to determine which rights exist under the Constitution. But if the record is uncertain, the justices are far more likely to allow states to decide for themselves, rather than “usurp the power to address a question of profound moral and social importance that the Constitution unequivocally leaves to the people,” wrote Alito.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Protesters hold up large cutout photos of Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett's heads outside the Supreme Court" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/470825/original/file-20220624-26-4sgiv9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Donald Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to the court with the idea that they would overturn Roe v. Wade.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/reproductive-rights-activists-hold-cut-out-photos-of-justices-brett-picture-id1236934230?s=2048x2048">Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Is a fetus now a person?</h2>
<p>Each state will decide.</p>
<p>The abortion debate has two core questions: Is there a right to abortion? And is a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/fetal-viability">fetus a person</a>?</p>
<p>Even if a right exists, this does not justify the killing of a person – who is another holder of rights. In Roe, the court decided for the nation what the boundaries of fetal personhood were in the early stages of pregnancy: A fetus could not be considered a person before viability at approximately six months, but states could decide during the last trimester. In Dobbs, the court changes course and allows each individual state to make its own determination.</p>
<p>Whether the court should decide disputed realities is a deeply divisive question. There was a fascinating case called <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-6135">Kahler v. Kansas</a> decided in 2020, which addressed the specific question of who gets to decide disputed social facts. In that case it was the boundaries of insanity: Could Kansas define mental illness and hence the insanity defense differently than other states? Does there have to be one definition throughout the nation about such matters as what counts as legally insane, or can we have variation?</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/589/18-6135/#tab-opinion-4226486">decision written by Justice Elena Kagan</a>, the court ruled that when realities are uncertain, individual state legislatures could decide for themselves. The same now applies to the personhood of a fetus. The power of individual states to decide social realities within their borders is the future of many constitutional disputes.</p>
<p>As Alito writes: “In some states, voters may believe that the abortion right should be even more extensive that the right that Roe and Casey recognized. Voters in other States may wish to impose tight restrictions based on their <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=39">belief that abortion destroys an ‘unborn human being</a>.’” </p>
<h2>What effect will the ruling have on other issues?</h2>
<p>In overturning Roe, the majority’s opinion offers a new and weaker standard for overturning the past rulings of the court. Simply put, precedents will be easier to overturn in the future.</p>
<p>For 30 years, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1991/91-744">the Casey ruling</a>, which upheld the core of Roe in 1992, has been considered the “precedent on precedent.” It established four considerations for the legitimate discarding of a previous decision: the ruling misunderstood the Constitution; it proved to be unworkable in practice; new facts have emerged; and it accounts for what are known as “reliance interests,” where citizens had been guided by a ruling in making decisions about their lives.</p>
<p>Dobbs reverses Roe by rewriting the law of precedent. This will open up many other cases for reversal.</p>
<p>The most significant change is what Alito calls “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=53">the quality of reasoning</a>.” Rulings that “<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=57">looked like legislation</a>,” offered faulty history or created standards unjustified by the Constitution can be overruled under the Dobbs standard.</p>
<p>The ruling includes a footnote describing all of the recent cases in which the court has overturned precedents. It may be the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=49">longest footnote</a> in contemporary Supreme Court history, coming in at over a page and a half. The conclusion is that the meaning of the Constitution is more important than the history of the court, so precedent “does not compel unending adherence to Roe’s <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf#page=14">abuse of judicial authority</a>,” Alito wrote.</p>
<p>Contrary to much speculation and worry, the Dobbs ruling and the new majority will not overturn protections of interracial marriage, especially the landmark ruling in <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1966/395">Loving v. Virginia</a>. That ruling hinges on the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection">equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment</a>, which is also enshrined in the text and is clearly protected under an original reading.</p>
<p>But other nonenumerated, evolved or created rights that are not textually protected are now up for question. This includes the right of same-sex marriage recognized by <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556">Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015</a>.</p>
<p>Questions of rights not explicitly protected by the Constitution – and therefore now in the hands of state legislatures – will rely much more heavily in the future on local democracy. Social movements, campaigns and elections, all at the state level, will become the main battleground of American rights.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185823/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Morgan Marietta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A Supreme Court scholar untangles the ideas that undergird the historic ruling overturning the Constitutional right to an abortion.Morgan Marietta, Associate Professor of Political Science, UMass LowellLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1490662020-11-04T12:39:21Z2020-11-04T12:39:21Z‘Rainbow wave’ of LGBTQ candidates run and win in 2020 election<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367418/original/file-20201104-15-1uiye72.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C7%2C4752%2C3142&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">LGBTQ candidates made strides on Tuesday.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/close-up-of-rainbow-flag-with-crowd-in-background-royalty-free-image/1135535265?adppopup=true">Marc Bruxelle / EyeEm</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>More LGBTQ candidates ran for office in the United States in 2020 than ever before – <a href="https://victoryfund.org/news/2020-lgbtq-candidate-diversity-report-released-at-least-1006-lgbtq-people-running-in-2020/">at least 1,006</a>. That’s a 41% increase over the 2018 midterms, according to the LGBTQ Victory Fund.</p>
<p>While an estimated 5% of the U.S. population identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/lgbtq-political-representation-jumped-21-percent-past-year-data-shows-n1234045">just 0.17% of elected officials</a> across all levels of the American government are LGBTQ. </p>
<p>Better political representation could help LGBTQ Americans maintain some of their hard-won rights, which have come under attack over the past four years. Since 2016, the Trump administration has weakened <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html">trans-inclusive protections in schools</a>, attempted to remove <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/06/12/868073068/transgender-health-protections-reversed-by-trump-administration">LGBTQ protections in health care</a> and proposed allowing <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/us/politics/hud-transgender.html">homeless shelters to turn away transgender people</a>.</p>
<p>Marriage equality, too, may be under threat. In early October, Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito suggested that the 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which made same-sex marriage legal across the United States, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/10/14/amy-coney-barretts-confirmation-may-mean-end-lgbtq-marriage/5952960002/">should be overturned</a>.</p>
<p>In short, candidates and LGBTQ rights were both on the ballot in the 2020 election, either explicitly or implicitly. While many questions remain undecided at press time, here’s the takeaway from four down-ballot races I’ve been following as a <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-prosper-act-could-negatively-impact-lgbtq-students-100135">scholar of LGBTQ politics</a>.</p>
<h2>Delaware</h2>
<p>Democrat <a href="https://victoryfund.org/candidate/sarah-mcbride/">Sarah McBride</a> made history on Tuesday when she <a href="https://www.advocate.com/politics/2020/11/03/sarah-mcbride-makes-history-nations-1st-openly-trans-state-sen?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=politics&fbclid=IwAR0AEWihkmnyi8Eq_oHg9FjVTUdqM0bgenfI7bx6wZjP44VKx7amNXlHy8w">won a state Senate seat</a> in Delaware. In doing so, she’ll become the United States’ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/15/us/politics/sarah-mcbride-delaware-transgender.html">highest-ranking transgender elected official</a> and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/15/us/politics/sarah-mcbride-delaware-transgender.html">first openly transgender person to serve in a state Senate</a> anywhere in the nation. McBride <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/03/sarah-mcbride-first-transgender-state-senator-delaware-433990">defeated Republican Steve Washington</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1323835825315028992"}"></div></p>
<p>Previously, <a href="https://victoryinstitute.org/team/roem-danica/">Danica Roem</a>, a Virginia Democrat who won a seat in the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017, was the <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2017-11-07/danica-roem-becomes-first-transgender-woman-to-win-state-seat-in-virginia">highest-ranking transgender person in elected office</a>. Roem <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/469163-danica-roem-wins-reelection-in-Virginia-state-legislature">was re-elected</a> in 2019.</p>
<p>Other transgender women, including <a href="https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/11/taylor-small-will-vermonts-first-transgender-legislator/">Taylor Smalls of Vermont</a> and <a href="https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/election/article246927272.html">Stephanie Byers of Kansas</a>, also won state-level races on Tuesday in notable victories. </p>
<h2>Hawaii and South Dakota</h2>
<p>At the start of this election cycle, only three U.S. states – Hawaii, South Dakota and Mississippi – had <a href="https://victoryfund.org/news/victory-fund-endorses-eight-more-lgbtq-candidates-for-2019-can-elect-lgbtq-city-councilmembers-across-the-country-2/">no openly LGBTQ elected officials</a> at any level of government. This year, candidates in Hawaii and South Dakota hoped to get their states off that list.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Headshot of Tam wearing a red lei" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367320/original/file-20201103-21-f62i89.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rep.-elect Tam of Hawai’s 22nd district.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://lgbtqnation-assets.imgix.net/2020/08/IMG_1648-scaled.jpg?w=790&h=530&fit=crop&auto=format&auto=compress&crop=faces">Facebook</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Democrat <a href="https://victoryfund.org/candidate/nieuwenhuis-jared/">Jared Nieuwenhuis</a> of South Dakota was <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/elections/results/race/2020-11-03-state-house-SD-42136/">unable to win a seat</a> for state House District 25 to become the state’s <a href="https://victoryfund.org/news/eight-lgbtq-election-night-stories-to-watch-live-tracking-results-for-310-victory-fund-endorsed-candidates/">first openly LGBTQ elected official in the state Legislature</a>. </p>
<p>However, in Hawaii, <a href="https://victoryfund.org/candidate/adrian-tam/">Adrian Tam</a> – who <a href="https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2020/08/09/with-huge-voter-turnout-primary-election-some-surprises-emerge/">upset a 14-year incumbent</a> in the August Democratic primary for the state House of Representatives – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-hawaii.html">defeated Republican Nicholas Ochs</a>, making him Hawaii’s <a href="https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/08/adrian-tam-way-becoming-lgbtq-elected-official-hawaii/">only openly LGBTQ elected official</a>.</p>
<h2>Georgia</h2>
<p>One Georgia Senate race <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/11/03/us/elections/results-georgia.html">remained undecided on election night</a>. The other – an unusual race called a “<a href="https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/georgia-will-now-have-two-senate-elections-in-2020/">jungle primary</a>” between Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler and <a href="https://www.13wmaz.com/article/news/politics/elections/who-are-the-candidates-in-the-georgia-special-us-senate-election/93-116bf2c3-5283-4621-9327-cd92cf67f704">20 other candidates from various parties</a> – has drawn national attention from LGBTQ advocates.</p>
<p>A political newcomer, Loeffler was <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/us/politics/kelly-loeffler-georgia-senate.html">appointed to her seat</a> by Gov. Brian Kemp in late 2019 following the retirement of longtime Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson. Neither Loeffler nor her top opponent in the jungle primary, Democratic contender the Rev. Raphael Warnock, received over 50% of the vote, so <a href="https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/georgia/senate-special-election">a runoff election will be held in the coming weeks</a>. </p>
<p>This runoff will be significant for the LGBTQ community because of Loeffler’s recent sponsorship of <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gop-senators-seek-ban-transgender-girls-female-sports-n1240992">a Senate bill to ban transgender girls</a> from playing school sports. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Loeffler speaks in front of a tree, wearing a beige pantsuit" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367094/original/file-20201102-23-waa0hr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Republican Sen. Kelly Loeffler of Georgia will have to defend her seat again in a runoff election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/sen-kelly-loeffler-at-a-brief-press-conference-after-voting-news-photo/1229046653?adppopup=true">Lynsey Weatherspoon/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Loeffler’s proposed legislation is similar to Idaho’s new “<a href="https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/capitol-watch/idaho-governor-little-signs-into-law-anti-transgender-legislation/277-8541e9d3-2cbb-4780-8f4b-5a9b59232594">Fairness in Women’s Sports Act</a>” – a law that could require girls who excel in athletics to “prove their gender” through a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPxV72MPOC8">genital exam, DNA test or testosterone test</a>. LGBTQ rights groups fear Loeffler’s bill would allow schools across the country to <a href="https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/09/gop-senator-introduces-bill-require-genital-exams-girls-competing-school-sports/">conduct genital examinations of student athletes</a> who are presumed to be transgender. </p>
<p>Warnock, a pastor at Georgia’s historic Ebenezer Baptist Church, has made a <a href="https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2020/10/27/senate-candidate-rev-warnock-religious-freedom-and-lgbtq-rights">strong public commitment</a> to LGBTQ rights and <a href="https://www.projectq.us/raphael-warnock-equality-act-needed-now-more-than-ever/">condemned Loeffler’s legislation,</a> saying in an interview with the LGBTQ outlet Project Q that “no one is free until we are all free.” </p>
<p>In the same interview, Warnock expressed his support for the <a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-equality-act">Equality Act</a>, proposed legislation that would add LGBTQ nondiscrimination protections into federal law.</p>
<p>[<em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=experts">Expertise in your inbox. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter and get expert takes on today’s news, every day.</a></em>]</p>
<h2>Historic victories and challenges ahead</h2>
<p>LGBTQ Americans <a href="https://www.washingtonblade.com/2016/11/14/lgbt-voters-rejected-trump-lopsided-margin/">vote heavily Democratic</a>. In 2008, John McCain won 27% of the LGBTQ vote while running for president against Barack Obama. In 2012, Mitt Romney won 22% of the LGBTQ vote. And in 2016, nationwide <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/meet-lgbtq-voters-who-backed-trump-n684181">exit poll data of LGBTQ voters</a> shows that Donald Trump received roughly 14% of the LGBTQ vote.</p>
<p>Harvey Milk, the late San Francisco city councilman, is <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/meet-lesbian-who-made-political-history-years-harvey-milk-n1174941">often incorrectly cited</a> as the first openly LGBTQ elected official. That pioneer was actually Kathy Kozachenko, who at age 21 won a seat on the Ann Arbor City Council in Michigan in 1974.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Black-and-white photo of Kozachenko wearing a newsboy hat" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=418&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/367321/original/file-20201103-19-8ekwbd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Kathy Kozachenko was an out lesbian and a college student when she was elected to the Ann Arbor City Council.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2020_14/3292216/200401-kathy-kozachenko-se-432p_5562e4b980f96e95de85a43ab1d47e3c.fit-2000w.jpg">Human Rights Party records / Bentley Historical Library, University of Michigan</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nearly 50 years later, LGBTQ candidates have made <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/rainbow-wave-2-0-nearly-100-lgbtq-candidates-claim-victory-n1077886">historic strides in political representation</a>. In 2017, there were <a href="https://victoryinstitute.org/news/america-report-map-provides-comprehensive-look-lgbtq-elected-officials-u-s/">under 450 openly LGBTQ elected officials</a> in the entire U.S. <a href="https://www.advocate.com/election/2018/11/07/84-plus-lgbtq-people-elected-amid-rainbow-wave">Over 150 LGBTQ candidates won</a> elections at the <a href="https://victoryinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Victory_Out-For-America-2018.pdf">federal, state and local levels in the 2018 midterm elections</a>. Another <a href="https://www.out.com/election/2019/11/06/over-80-lgbtq-candidates-won-election-2019-rainbow-wave">“rainbow wave”</a> came in 2019, bringing the total number of openly LGBTQ American elected officials to <a href="https://victoryinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Victory-Institute-Out-for-America-Report-2019.pdf">just under 700</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/bowmanmarsico/2020/07/28/the-march-of-public-opinion-on-lgbt-identity-and-issues/?sh=67afe34b0996">Social acceptance of LGBTQ people</a> is growing too, with over 70% of Americans saying transgender people should be protected from discrimination, according to polling by the <a href="https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Public-Opinion-Trans-US-Aug-2019.pdf">Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law</a>, and a similar percentage supporting <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/311672/support-sex-marriage-matches-record-high.aspx">marriage equality</a>. That has translated into ever more openly LGBTQ candidates running for office – and winning.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/149066/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy R. Bussey made small contributions to several 2020 Democratic campaigns but did not support, endorse, or in any other way aid any of the candidates discussed in this story.</span></em></p>Delaware’s Sarah McBride made history on Tuesday when she won a state Senate seat, becoming the US’s highest-ranking transgender politician. A record 1,006 LGBTQ candidates ran for office this year.Dorian Rhea Debussy, Associate Director for the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Kenyon CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1486072020-10-22T18:12:11Z2020-10-22T18:12:11ZPope Francis’ support for civil unions is a call to justice – and nothing new<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/365019/original/file-20201022-19-voklt1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C1997%2C1497&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Pope Francis' comments on same-sex unions underline his commitment to justice for all.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/pope-francis-holds-communion-as-he-celebrates-mass-at-the-news-photo/174344803?adppopup=true">Buda Mendes/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Pope Francis signaled his support for members of the LGBT community to enter civil unions in <a href="https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-calls-for-civil-union-law-for-same-sex-couples-in-shift-from-vatican-stance-12462">a new documentary</a> released on Oct. 21. It wasn’t the first time.</p>
<p>Francis has spoken up for civil unions before, as he reminded the film’s interviewer. “I stood up for that,” he said. And, he did – both when he mentioned civil unions in <a href="https://www.thecatholictelegraph.com/in-new-book-pope-upholds-traditional-marriage-need-to-help-sinners/44816">2017</a> and before that in <a href="https://www.corriere.it/cronache/14_marzo_04/vi-racconto-mio-primo-anno-papa-90f8a1c4-a3eb-11e3-b352-9ec6f8a34ecc.shtml">2014</a>. He was supportive of civil unions prior to the papacy, too, <a href="https://twitter.com/austeni/status/1318959743361339395">when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires</a>.</p>
<p>So in an important sense, there is nothing to see here – nothing new. Yet Francis’ message here does matter.</p>
<h2>Justice for all</h2>
<p>The pope’s support for civil unions does not change Catholic doctrine about marriage or sexuality. The church still teaches – and will go on teaching – that any sexual relationship outside a marriage is sinful and that, in the Catholic view, marriage – different from civil unions – is between a man and a woman. </p>
<p>Really, Pope Francis’ call for civil unions is a way to express what Catholics believe about human dignity in response to new social and political conditions that have brought rapidly changed attitudes toward the LGBT community across the last two decades. Pope Francis is calling on Catholics to take note that they have to be concerned about justice for all people, including those in the LGBT community.</p>
<p>Some Catholics already are voicing their <a href="https://archny.org/dealing-with-papal-mistakes/">displeasure</a>, fearing the pope’s comments will sow confusion. Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island, went so far as to criticize Pope Francis for <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/10/21/metro/bishop-tobin-criticizes-pope-francis-again-this-time-over-civil-unions-gay-people/">“contradict[ing] what has been the long-standing teaching of the church.”</a></p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>But as a <a href="https://ctu.edu/faculty/steven-millies/">scholar of the Catholic Church and society</a>, I believe there is a firm foundation to say that what Pope Francis says on civil unions grows directly from church teaching. The “<a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#INTRODUCTION">law of love embraces the entire human family and knows no limits</a>,” the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, the Vatican office concerned with social issues, said in its 2005 compilation of the church’s social thought.</p>
<h2>Equal rights</h2>
<p>Back in 2006, U.S. Catholic bishops recognized that LGBT people <a href="https://www.usccb.org/resources/ministry-to-persons-of-homosexual-iInclination_0.pdf">“have been, and often continue to be, objects of scorn, hatred, and even violence</a>.” And, those things that express our care for other human persons – <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html">“especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted”</a> by the indifference or oppression of others – represent obligations that faithful Catholics embrace. </p>
<p>In these ways, Catholics owe a duty of justice to the LGBT community. </p>
<p>One way this duty of justice can be expressed is through the support of political and legal rights for all. As much as Catholics believe that governments should recognize a right to private property, they can believe that people in committed relationships should enjoy a legally protected ability to transfer their property as they wish. </p>
<p>Because Catholics believe in being present with the sick or the dying – what the church calls a <a href="https://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/how-we-teach/new-evangelization/jubilee-of-mercy/the-corporal-works-of-mercy">corporal work of mercy</a> – it follows that people should not be kept from their loved ones’ bedsides because of legal barriers. That can and does happen if someone’s partner is not recognized in law as next of kin. Likewise, because someone is from the LGBT community, they should not be excluded from the human community or the love of another person.</p>
<p>LGBT people also have a right to be a part of families, as they have a right to be free from discrimination and prejudice. As <a href="https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-francis-calls-for-civil-union-law-for-same-sex-couples-in-shift-from-vatican-stance-12462">Pope Francis said</a> in the new documentary, “Nobody should be thrown out, or be made miserable.”</p>
<h2>Reacting to societal change</h2>
<p>The rapid change that has happened in prevailing social attitudes about the LGBT community in recent decades has been a hard thing to process for a church that has never reacted quickly. This is especially because the questions those developments raise touch on a gray area where moral teaching meets social realities outside the church – such as arguments about <a href="https://www.rbmojournal.com/article/S1472-6483(11)00114-3/fulltext">the contraceptive mandate</a> and the use of condoms. This meeting between social issues or concerns and the church is often a meeting of ragged edges that can produce friction.</p>
<p>Yet, church leaders have been working on the problem of reconciling the church with the modern world, and Pope Francis is not stepping in places where other Catholic bishops have not already trod.</p>
<p>In 2018, German bishops reacting to the legalization of gay marriage acknowledged that acceptance of LGBT relationships is a new “<a href="https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/01/24/german-bishops-grapple-blessings-gay-marriage">political reality</a>.”</p>
<p>“I’m not for ‘marriage for all,’” said Münster auxiliary Bishop Dieter Geerlings, “but if two homosexuals enter a same-sex relationship, if they want to take responsibility for each other, then I can bless this mutual responsibility.”</p>
<p>Osnabrück Bishop Franz-Josef Bode agreed, “We could think about giving them a blessing.” </p>
<p>The challenge the Vatican faces is to imagine the space that the church can occupy in this new reality, as it has had to do in the face of numerous social and political changes over the years. But the imperative, as Francis suggests, is to serve justice and to seek justice for all people. </p>
<p>Catholics – including bishops, and even the pope – can think, and are thinking, imaginatively about that challenge.</p>
<p>
<section class="inline-content">
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/338598/original/file-20200529-78871-1g5gse5.jpg?w=128&h=128">
<div>
<header></header>
<p><a href="https://www.ats.edu/">Catholic Theological Union is a member of the Association of Theological Schools.</a></p>
<footer>The ATS is a funding partner of The Conversation US.</footer>
</div>
</section>
</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/148607/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven P. Millies does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The pontiff hasn’t changed church teaching on marriage in indicating support for same-sex civil unions. Rather, he is reminding Catholics they should be concerned about justice for all.Steven P. Millies, Associate Professor of Public Theology and director of The Bernardin Center, Catholic Theological UnionLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1315982020-02-17T13:07:12Z2020-02-17T13:07:12ZDesmond Tutu’s long history of fighting for lesbian and gay rights<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/315038/original/file-20200212-61947-ufl55a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Robert Tshabalala/Business Day/Gallo Images/Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.sahistory.org.za/people/archbishop-emeritus-desmond-mpilo-tutu">Archbishop Desmond Mpilo Tutu</a> is mostly known to the world for his highly prominent role in the campaign against <a href="https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/history-apartheid-south-africa">apartheid</a> in South Africa. This role was internationally recognised by the awarding of the <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/1984/summary/">1984 Nobel Peace Prize</a>. </p>
<p>Tutu continued his activism even after the country’s democratic transition in South Africa in the early 1990s. Among other things, he served as chair of the country’s <a href="https://www.justice.gov.za/trc/">Truth and Reconciliation Commission</a> which sought to deal with the crimes and injustices under apartheid, and to bring about justice, healing and reconciliation in a wounded society. He retired as Archbishop of Cape Town in 1996.</p>
<p>In more recent years Tutu has become known for his strong advocacy on issues of sexuality, in particular the rights of lesbian and gay people. For instance, in 2013, he made global headlines with the clear and <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-23464694">succinct statement</a>, in typical Tutu fashion, that he:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>would rather go to hell than to a homophobic heaven.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Tutu is by far the most high-profile African, if not global, religious leader to support lesbian and gay rights. This has added to his international reputation as a progressive thinker and activist, especially in the western world. But his stance has been met with suspicion on the African continent itself. A fellow Anglican bishop, Emmanuel Chukwuma from Nigeria, even declared him to be “<a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bsxXDwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1&dq=Emmanuel%20Chukwuma%20%22spiritually%20dead%22&pg=PT8#v=onepage&q=spiritually%20dead&f=false">spiritually dead</a>”.</p>
<p>For distant observers, Tutu’s advocacy around sexuality might appear to be a recent phenomenon. For his critics, it might be another illustration of how he has tried to be the darling of white liberal audiences in the Western world. </p>
<p>In fact his commitment to defending gay and lesbian rights isn’t a recent development; it dates as far back as the 1970s. In addition, it is very much in continuity with his long-standing resistance against apartheid and his relentless defence of black civil rights in South Africa.</p>
<h2>Common thread</h2>
<p>Shortly after the end of apartheid in 1994, Tutu <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yYHcK6kWcPAC&lpg=PP1&dq=aliens%20household%20god%20gruchy&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=worthy%20moral&f=true">wrote</a> that</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If the church, after the victory over apartheid, is looking for a worthy moral crusade, then this is it: the fight against homophobia and heterosexism. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Driving both struggles is Tutu’s strong moral and political commitment to defending the human dignity and rights of all people. Theologically, this is rooted in his conviction that every human being is created in the image of God and therefore is worthy of respect.</p>
<p>In the 1980s, Tutu and other Christian leaders had used the concept of ‘heresy’ to denounce apartheid in the strongest theological language. They famously stated that “<a href="https://www.sahistory.org.za/sites/default/files/archive-files2/remar84.7.pdf">apartheid is a heresy</a>”, meaning that it is in conflict with the most fundamental Christian teaching. </p>
<p>Tutu also used another strong theological term: blasphemy, meaning an insult of God-self. In 1984, he wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Apartheid’s most blasphemous aspect is … that it can make a child of God doubt that he is a child of God. For that reason alone, it deserves to be condemned as a heresy. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>More than a decade later, Tutu used very similar words to denounce homophobia and heterosexism. He wrote that it was “<a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yYHcK6kWcPAC&lpg=PP1&dq=aliens%20household%20god%20gruchy&pg=PP14#v=onepage&q=ultimate%20blasphemy%20&f=false">the ultimate blasphemy</a>” to make lesbian and gay people doubt whether they truly were children of God and whether their sexuality was part of how they were created by God.</p>
<p>Tutu’s equation of black civil rights and lesbian and gay rights is part of a broader South African narrative and dates back to the days of the apartheid struggle. Openly gay anti-apartheid activists, such as <a href="https://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/tseko-simon-nkoli-dies">Simon Nkoli</a>, had actively participated in the liberation movement, and had successfully intertwined the struggles against racism and homophobia. </p>
<p>On the basis of this history, South Africa’s <a href="https://www.gov.za/documents/constitution-republic-south-africa-1996">Constitution</a>, adopted in 1996, included a <a href="https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2000-004.pdf">non-discrimination clause</a> that lists sexual orientation, alongside race and other characteristics. It was the first country in the world to do so, and Tutu had actively lobbied for it. </p>
<p>A decade later, South Africa became the sixth country in the world to <a href="https://www.brandsouthafrica.com/governance/services/rights/south-africa-legalises-gay-marriage">legalise same-sex marriage</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/315040/original/file-20200212-61966-m5e4cw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Reverend Mpho Andrea Tutu and Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town Desmond Tutu attend an award gala in New York City.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Thos Robinson/Getty Images/Shared Interest</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Attitudes still need work</h2>
<p>Arguably, these legal provisions did not automatically translate into a change of social attitudes towards lesbian and gay people at a grassroots level. <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/south-africa-road-to-lgbtq-equality/">Homophobia remains widespread</a> in South African society today. </p>
<p>Tutu’s own church, the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, continues to struggle with gay issues. In 2015 his daughter, Mpho Tutu, had to give up her <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/09/mpho-tutu-van-furth-its-painful-to-step-down-from-my-priestly-ministry">position as an ordained priest after she married a woman</a>. Tutu gave the newly wed couple a blessing anyway.</p>
<p>The question of same-sex relationships and the status of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people continues to be controversial across the world. In this context, Tutu is an influential figure who uses his moral authority to help shape the debates. </p>
<p>His equation of racial and sexual equality is particularly important, as it foregrounds how the struggle for justice, equality and human rights are interconnected: we cannot claim rights for one group of people while denying them to others.</p>
<p><em>This article is an abbreviated version of a chapter about Desmond Tutu in the book Reimagining Christianity and Sexuality in Africa, co-authored by Adriaan van Klinken and Ezra Chitando, and to be published with Zed Books in London (2021).</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/131598/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adriaan van Klinken receives funding for research projects from the Arts and Humanities Research Council in the UK, and from the British Academy. </span></em></p>Desmond Tutu is by far the most high-profile African, if not global, religious leader to support lesbian and gay rights, and he has done so since the 1970s.Adriaan van Klinken, Professor of Religion and African Studies, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1266642019-11-14T13:00:20Z2019-11-14T13:00:20ZHow much credit should corporations get for the advancement of LGBTQ rights?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301368/original/file-20191112-178532-1ns9hub.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Large corporations have both contributed to the expansion of LGBTQ equality and served as a bulwark against conservative backlash.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/33625151@N03/8150080687/sizes/h/in/photostream/">cobravictor/flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Long targeted by LGBTQ activists for its opposition to gay marraige, the fast-food chain Chick-fil-A <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/18/business/chick-fil-a-donations-lgbtq.html">just announced</a> that it would no longer donate money to two groups, the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the Salvation Army, that have been criticized for LGBTQ discrimination.</em> </p>
<p><em>Was this an olive branch? Or simply a public relations decision to burnish a brand tarnished by years of protests?</em> </p>
<p><em>Whatever the reason, Chick-fil-A is late to the party.</em></p>
<p><em>Gay pride parades increasingly include <a href="https://www.bostonpride.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019_Parade_Detail_List_2019-06-02_Alpha_Order.pdf">marchers representing corporations</a>, from defense contractor <a href="https://billbrettboston.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Boston-Gay-Pride-117.jpg">Raytheon</a> to telecommunications conglomerate <a href="https://www.bostonpride.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019_Parade_Detail_List_2019-06-02_Alpha_Order.pdf">Comcast</a>. During the most recent Pride Month, Starbucks unveiled its “<a href="https://stories.starbucks.com/stories/2019/love-meet-the-designer-of-the-starbucks-pride-cup-people-are-buzzing-about/">Pride Cup</a>,” while Target released a <a href="https://corporate.target.com/article/2019/06/pride">Pride line</a> of clothing and accessories.</em> </p>
<p><em>It’s easy to view these gestures through a lens of cynicism – that they’re a way for companies to generate positive media coverage while they continue to pay their workers the minimum wage or build drones. With <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/257705/support-gay-marriage-stable.aspx">63% of Americans</a> now supporting gay marriage, a company that celebrates LGBTQ pride is likely making a sound marketing decision that’s not particularly controversial.</em></p>
<p><em>But back in the 1980s and 1990s, when a much lower percentage of Americans were sympathetic to the cause, only a handful of companies stuck out their necks in support of LGBTQ rights. Which companies did so? And what spurred their support for LGBTQ equality? Those are questions law professor Carlos Ball explores in his new book, “<a href="http://www.beacon.org/The-Queering-of-Corporate-America-P1520.aspx">The Queering of Corporate America</a>,” in which he details how, over the course of 40 years, gay rights activists and corporations went from adversaries to partners.</em></p>
<p><em>In an interview, which has been edited for length and clarity, Ball explains why corporations were among the first targets of gay rights activists and why many of these same corporations eventually embraced their role as LGBTQ allies. But he also points to the limits of corporate advocacy.</em></p>
<hr>
<p><strong>In the 1970s, what could happen to you if a company found out you were gay?</strong></p>
<p>You could very easily be fired on the spot. You could be demoted. You could be subject to harassment. </p>
<p>As part of its application process, Coors, for many years, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/obituaries/william-coors-dies-at-102.html">attached candidates to a lie detector test</a> and asked them a whole range of questions, including whether they had ever had a same-sex relationship. Pacific Bell, which back then was the largest private employer in California, <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/24/458.html">claimed</a> that employing openly LGBTQ people would put its customers, employees and reputation at risk.</p>
<p>If you were fired for being gay, you would have had absolutely no legal remedies available to you, unless you lived in a handful of very liberal municipalities that had enacted anti-discrimination ordinances. </p>
<p>Even today, there are about <a href="https://www.freedomforallamericans.org/states/">30 states</a> in the U.S. that don’t explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. And the question of whether federal law – <a href="https://www.aauw.org/what-we-do/legal-resources/know-your-rights-at-work/title-vii/">Title VII</a> of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity is actually <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/us/politics/supreme-court-gay-transgender.html">before the U.S. Supreme Court right now</a>.</p>
<p><strong>How did some of the earliest activists bring attention to the issue of LGBTQ rights in the workplace?</strong></p>
<p>They simply didn’t have the resources or people power to try to pressure large numbers of big companies, so they had to pick and choose which companies to target. Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Task Force, as it was then known, sent out a bunch of letters asking corporations about their treatment of sexual minorities. </p>
<p>The vast number of corporations refused to answer. But then you had some that replied by saying, in effect, “We do discriminate, and we don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. We don’t think our employees or our customers want to interact with openly gay people.” </p>
<p>Pacific Bell was one of the companies that wrote back saying, essentially, “We discriminate against gay people and we’re proud about that.” And so they became, not surprisingly, one of the first targets of LGBTQ activism aimed at large corporations. There were street demonstrations, meetings with San Francisco officials, letter-writing campaigns – all targeting Pacific Bell for its overt homophobia</p>
<p>The activism worked. By the mid-1980s, Pacific Bell was on its way to becoming a model corporate citizen on LGBTQ rights issues, <a href="https://hbr.org/1989/05/uncommon-decency-pacific-bell-responds-to-aids">in particular when it came to how it responded to the AIDS epidemic</a>.</p>
<p><strong>That’s a pattern you note with a few other companies – how activists targeted some of the most outwardly homophobic companies, and, within a few years, they became some of the most visible allies.</strong></p>
<p>Large companies spend millions of dollars marketing their brands. Anything that potentially tarnishes those brands, they pay attention to. </p>
<p>And activists made enough noise and got enough attention that executives made, in some ways, rational business decisions. They realized the negative publicity wasn’t good for their bottom line.</p>
<p>But I think, as the activism continued, executives were also persuaded that supporting LGBTQ equality was the right thing to do. They came to accept the basic argument that their LGBTQ employees were of equal merit and of equal worth as their heterosexual employees.</p>
<p>Now, this didn’t happen overnight. And it didn’t happen, by any means, at all companies. But it’s a trend that starts in the early 1970s and, as the activism grows, becomes more pronounced as the decades went on.</p>
<p><strong>Why did activists target corporations instead of politicians?</strong></p>
<p>Back in the 1970s and 1980s, it was extremely difficult to persuade a majority of legislators and voters to support LGBTQ civil rights laws. You simply don’t have to convince as many people when you are trying to persuade a company to adopt LGBTQ-friendly policies. All that it really takes is persuading a handful of top executives.</p>
<p>I think market forces also played an important role. First, by the time we get to the late 1980s and early 1990s, progressive consumers are starting to want to spend their dollars on goods and services provided by companies that reflect their values.</p>
<p>And second, I think having these policies in place allowed companies to attract and retain the most qualified employees. An LGBTQ job applicant who had the choice between two companies, one of which offered domestic partnership benefits and one that didn’t, was likely to go with the company that offered the benefits, because that was a signal that the company supported equal rights and treatment.</p>
<p><strong>At the same time, you point to this phenomenon of “corporate schizophrenia.”</strong></p>
<p>Right. Take Philip Morris. The company <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5068916/">donated large sums of money</a> to groups like the American Foundation for AIDS Research. But – and I guess this is where the schizophrenia comes in – <a href="https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/2/203">they were also financially supporting</a> hard-right, homophobic politicians like Senator Jesse Helms, who, at one point, <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1987-06-16-8702140384-story.html">actually called for the quarantining of people with AIDS</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=457&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/301194/original/file-20191112-178520-1ptq41x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=575&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms whispers into the ear of President Ronald Reagan during a campaign event in 1984.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-AP-A-NC-USA-APHS391541-President-Ronald-/212e5941521c490c923cc2008ae51b1c/22/0">AP Photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And while corporations deserve a lot of credit for being <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-backlash-to-north-carolinas-lgbt-non-discrimination-ban/475500/">an important part of the coalition</a> that resisted the transgender bathroom bill <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/north-carolina-gender-bathrooms-bill/index.html">enacted by the North Carolina legislature in 2016</a>, many of these same corporations were funding the Republican elected officials who wrote and supported that law.</p>
<p><strong>How did corporations respond to the AIDS crisis in the 1980s?</strong></p>
<p>I would say that the overall track record of corporate America during the early years of the AIDS epidemic was terrible. Like most important and influential institutions in the U.S., large companies responded to AIDS with a toxic combination of prejudice and neglect.</p>
<p>The vast majority of corporations either implemented actual discriminatory policies – like placing health insurance reimbursement caps of US$5,000 for AIDS-related conditions – or allowed discrimination to take place by looking the other way.</p>
<p>However, there was a handful of corporations – for example, Pacific Bell, Bank of America and Westinghouse – that decided they couldn’t ignore the issue any longer. Like many large companies, they had employees who were so paranoid or homophobic that they refused to work alongside anybody who was gay, because the assumption was that if you were a gay man, you were HIV-positive. Large companies were getting many requests for transfers. They were also witnessing employees walking out of workplaces, en masse, when an HIV-positive employee was allowed to return to work after receiving medical treatment.</p>
<p>But rather than dealing with these problems on an ad-hoc basis, or by siding with their homophobic employees, executives at some corporations looked into the issue, consulted with public health experts and basically decided that it didn’t make sense to treat HIV-positive employees any differently from how they treated employees who had cancer or heart conditions. </p>
<p>It seems so obvious today, but one executive for Pacific Bell said, “Our employees with AIDS are sick, and we don’t fire our sick employees.” In 1985, that mattered. It was a simple statement of humanity, and it made a big difference.</p>
<p>In doing my research for the book, I was surprised to learn that a handful of large businesses were the earliest powerful institutions in the U.S. to respond to AIDS in sensible and humane ways. Before government, before unions, before universities, before many religious organizations, these companies took the lead on AIDS issues.</p>
<p><strong>Companies are usually loath to publicly wade into polarizing political issues. Why, by the 21st century, did so many publicly take a stand in favor of marriage equality?</strong></p>
<p>I think the 30 years of activism aimed at corporations that preceded that public stand made a huge difference. By the 21st century, LGBTQ rights issues were no longer new issues for corporations. </p>
<p>There were about eight Fortune 500 companies that provided domestic partner benefits in 1993. By 2001, <a href="https://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/changing-corporate-america-from-inside-out">the number was over 100</a>. So this revolution was already taking place inside corporate America. Executives and corporate board members were learning that LGBTQ equality measures were good for their companies. But they were also learning that true equality was not possible unless the government itself stopped discriminating. </p>
<p>Large companies had adopted domestic partner benefits, they had adopted these non-discrimination policies, and there had really been no downside for them. Sure, some socially conservative groups were upset and there were a couple of boycotts called by right-wing organizations. But those really went nowhere.</p>
<p>By the time the same-sex marriage issue reached the Supreme Court, <a href="https://qz.com/359424/every-us-company-arguing-for-the-supreme-court-to-legalize-same-sex-marriage/">hundreds of corporations</a> joined activists to ask the justices to recognize a constitutional right to marriage equality. And this had a tremendous political and legal impact. After all, these were not radical left-wing organizations that were making this demand. What can be more mainstream than Procter & Gamble and General Electric?</p>
<p><strong>What are some of the limits of this public-facing, corporate activism?</strong></p>
<p>That’s a very important question. Large corporations have certainly contributed to the expansion of LGBTQ equality in the United States and have, in the last few years, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/07/business-against-texas-bathroom-bill/533928/">served as an important bulwark</a> to protect those gains from conservative backlash.</p>
<p>That being said, nothing in the book is intended to suggest that corporations are always on the right side of disputed policy issues. There’s a whole plethora of positions that some large corporations take that are problematic from a progressive perspective, whether we’re talking about labor or environmental or taxation issues. </p>
<p>You’ll also see corporations be supportive of gay rights in the U.S. but then refuse to criticize foreign governments in other countries where they do business for their anti-LGBT laws and policies. </p>
<p>There will be times when the interests of corporations will align with the interests of activists, but you have to keep in mind that corporations, at the end of the day, are going to do what they believe is in their economic interest. </p>
<p><strong>It seems like the gay rights issue is a lot easier for companies to publicly support, compared with other issues, like economic inequality.</strong></p>
<p>Sure, in some ways, LGBTQ rights is an easier issue. But it wasn’t always easy, right? It became easy as a result of 40 years of activism.</p>
<p>You know, this book is being published at an interesting time. The country and corporate leaders have been having this broader conversation about the role of large corporations in American society.</p>
<p>We have the statement by the Business Roundtable <a href="https://theconversation.com/companies-dont-need-permission-from-the-business-roundtable-to-be-better-corporate-citizens-122245">over the summer</a> about how corporations need to not just look out for the interests of their shareholders but also their employees, customers and the communities where they’re located. And so we’re starting to see – on issues like gun control, on immigration reform – corporations take more public stances, sometimes supporting progressive policy positions.</p>
<p>I find it kind of promising that there’s this bigger conversation that we seem to be having about the role and responsibilities of companies and large corporations in our democracy. And I’m hoping that this book can be a part of that conversation.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of an article originally published on Nov. 14.</em></p>
<p>[ <em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126664/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
In an interview, law professor Carlos Ball explains how gay rights activists and corporations went from adversaries to partners. But would the alliance have happened if it had hurt companies’ bottom lines?Nick Lehr, Arts + Culture EditorLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1218652019-09-20T12:35:08Z2019-09-20T12:35:08ZMarriage could be good for your health – unless you’re bisexual<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288797/original/file-20190820-170918-x76amm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Married – but perhaps not reaping all the benefits.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/gay-men-their-wedding-rings-41050975?src=4on39YZg3au5tc8IkGhqXQ-1-44">Chris Howey/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Is marriage good for you?</p>
<p>A large number of studies show that married people enjoy better health than unmarried people, such as <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180410132857.htm">lower rates of depression</a> and <a href="https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/the-magnitude-of-marriage-better-for-your-heart">cardiovascular conditions</a>, as well as <a href="https://www.health.harvard.edu/mens-health/marriage-and-mens-health">longer lives</a>. </p>
<p>However, these findings have been developed primarily based on data of heterosexual populations and different-sex marriages. Only more recently have a few studies <a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301113">looked into gay</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.09.013">and lesbian populations and same-sex marriages</a> to test if marriage is related to better health in these populations – and the evidence is mixed. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-019-00813-2">Our study</a>, published online on Sept. 19, evaluates the advantages of marriage across heterosexual, bisexual, and gay or lesbian adults. We discovered that bisexual adults do not experience better health when married.</p>
<h2>Marriage and health data</h2>
<p>Using representative data from the 2013 to 2017 <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/index.htm">National Health Interview Survey</a>, we compared reports of self-rated health and functional limitation – difficulty doing activities without assistance or special equipment – across 1,428 bisexual adults, 2,654 gay and lesbian adults and 150,403 heterosexual adults. </p>
<p>Both heterosexual and gay and lesbian individuals are better off in terms of health when they are married than when unmarried. </p>
<p>For example, the odds of reporting good health are about 36% higher among married gay and lesbian adults than never married or previously married gay and lesbian adults. </p>
<p>Rates of functional limitation, such as difficulty climbing stairs and going out for shopping, are 25% to 43% lower among married heterosexual adults than cohabiting, never married and previously married heterosexual adults.</p>
<p>Why does this happen? There are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00728.x">two popular explanations</a>. </p>
<p>The marriage protection argument posits that marriage increases economic security and social support and encourages healthier lifestyles – for example, less smoking and drinking. </p>
<p>The marriage selection argument suggests that people with more education, income and other health-favorable characteristics are more likely to get married and stay in marriage.</p>
<p>However, unlike heterosexual and gay or lesbian adults, our study shows that married bisexuals are not healthier than unmarried bisexuals.</p>
<p>Interestingly, among bisexuals who are married or cohabiting, those with a same-sex partner are healthier than those with a different-sex partner. Their odds of reporting good health are 2.3 times higher and the rates of functional limitation are 61% lower.</p>
<h2>Relationship stigma</h2>
<p>Our findings suggest that bisexuals face unique challenges in their relationships that may reduce the health advantage linked to marriage. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.174169">A growing number of studies</a> have found that bisexual individuals experience poorer health than heterosexual, gay or lesbian individuals. This includes higher rates of mental disorders, cardiovascular conditions and disability. </p>
<p>Bisexual people are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1300/J159v04n01_09">often perceived by both heterosexual and gay and lesbian people</a> as indecisive about their sexual orientation, sexually permissive, and unfaithful or untrustworthy as romantic partners. For example, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0263-9">an experimental study</a> showed that people more often project such negative stereotypes onto a bisexual man dating a woman than they do onto a heterosexual man dating a woman or a gay man dating a man.</p>
<p>Researchers like ourselves still don’t fully understand the ways in which stigma influences bisexuals’ relationships and health. </p>
<p>We suspect that this stigma may undermine the health and well-being of bisexual people. It may strain their relationships and create expectations of rejection. Their efforts to conceal a bisexual identity from a partner or other people may also trigger stress.</p>
<p><a href="https://scholar.google.com.tw/citations?user=7OA2bO4AAAAJ&hl=en">We</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=iUuSyygAAAAJ&hl=en">hope</a> to see marriage one day become not only more accessible to all, but also equally favorable for all. </p>
<p>[ <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=thanksforreading">Thanks for reading! We can send you The Conversation’s stories every day in an informative email. Sign up today.</a></em> ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121865/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ning Hsieh receives funding from National Institute on Aging (R01AG061118). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hui Liu receives funding from National Institute on Aging (R01AG061118 and K01AG043417).</span></em></p>Studies suggest that marriage improves your health. But bisexuals don’t seem to reap those benefits.Ning Hsieh, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Michigan State UniversityHui Liu, Professor of Sociology, Michigan State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1215062019-08-15T20:02:29Z2019-08-15T20:02:29ZFriday essay: my brush with Susan Sontag and other tales from the gay ‘golden age’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287810/original/file-20190813-9429-1lmgtro.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=22%2C176%2C2487%2C1896&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Dennis Altman in Santa Cruz California in 1984,</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The years between the gay liberation movement at the beginning of the 1970s and the onset of AIDS a decade later are viewed in a certain strand of gay nostalgia as “the golden age”.</p>
<p>It’s hardly surprising that those who lived through the period might see it this way; in retrospect all youth is golden. What is surprising is the extent to which men not then adult — perhaps not yet born — have accepted the idea and are slightly disappointed when I try to disillusion them.</p>
<p>For me the entry to New York’s so-called golden age came one day in November 1977 when I had brunch with Michael Denneny, Edmund White, Doug Ireland and Chuck Ortleb. </p>
<p>Between them the four men represented an extraordinary agglomeration of gay cultural power: Denneny, the slightly acerbic editor who turned St Martin’s Press into a crucible for queer writing; Ireland, the cherubic faced, smart leftist journalist who knew everyone and would die of diabetes and stroke in 2013; White, then a fresh faced and largely unknown <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/15975.Edmund_White">novelist</a>; Ortleb, editor of <a href="https://www.pinterest.com.au/cmfragrance/christopher-street-magazine/">Christopher Street Magazine</a>, the most prominent queer literary magazine to date. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=875&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1100&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1100&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287812/original/file-20190813-9429-1x9x9on.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1100&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The author in Manhattan circa 1983/4.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Three years later Ortleb and Denneny would found <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Native">The New York Native</a>, the cutting edge of gay journalism until it collapsed in a frenzy of denialism that HIV was the cause of AIDS.</p>
<p>Looking back what strikes me is the immediate intimacy of gay literary and political New York. The radicals of the early 1970s were gradually winning respect in a broader world, but there were still few enough people who were open about their sexuality for it to establish a common bond. It seemed possible, then, to know everyone; my diary mentions meeting the German film director, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0902823/">Rosa von Praunheim</a> and the Argentinian writer Manuel Puig.</p>
<p>I have no memory of Praunheim, whose film <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066136/?ref_=nm_flmg_dr_83">It Is Not the Homosexual Who Is Perverse, But the Society in Which He Lives</a> was an important influence on the German gay movement. I desperately wanted to meet Puig, because he had footnoted me several times in his novel <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/search?q=Kiss+of+the+Spider+Woman">Kiss of the Spider Woman</a>, an unusual device for a novel. </p>
<p>I met a small, depressed man in a downtown apartment, described by Suzanne Levine in her excellent book about Puig as “replicating the monkish austerity of his room in Buenos Aires”.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287307/original/file-20190808-144868-1l17lal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Manuel Puig in 1979.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikimedia Commons</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The overwhelming attraction of the New York gay literati world was sufficient for me to resign my lectureship at Sydney University and move to New York in 1981. The ten years at Sydney had been exciting, marked by bitter disputes within Philosophy and Economics, which led to a student strike and both departments splitting between traditionalists and radicals.</p>
<p>But the prospect of 30 more years in the same institution was stultifying: I wanted to live out the fantasy of becoming a real writer. </p>
<p>My New York in the first term of Reagan’s Presidency was defined by two extraordinary groups, the gay literati clustered around Christopher Street and the New York Native, and the hothouse intellectual world of New York University’s Institute for the Humanities, presided over by the sociologist <a href="https://www.richardsennett.com/site/senn/templates/home.aspx?pageid=1&cc=gb">Richard Sennett</a>. </p>
<h2>The Violet Quill</h2>
<p>The link between the two was Edmund White, a man of southern charm and northern ambition, ruthless in his pursuit of celebrity and celebrities, and capable of both great generosity and sudden barbs of wickedness. Edmund was one of group of gay writers who made up what became known as the Violet Quill.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=919&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=919&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=919&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1155&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1155&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/288085/original/file-20190814-136222-163mc21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1155&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">White’s memoir of his time in 60s and 70s New York.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">goodreads</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Urged on by Doug Ireland who was then an editor at the Soho News, a spunkier version of the Village Voice, I wrote a piece called “a movable brunch — the fag lit mafia”, of which Christopher Bram later wrote: “This bitchery was the first bit of fame for the group.” </p>
<p>But gay writing was beginning to encroach on high culture. There was excitement when the New Yorker published what was thought to be its first overtly gay short story (David Leavitt’s Territory) in 1981 — and some chagrin amongst other New York writers. Now the New Yorker publishes gay cartoons and stories without comment.</p>
<p>Edmund was a central figure at the Institute for the Humanities, which I once described as the New York Review of Books at lunch, perhaps because of memories of seminars dominated by the presence of Susan Sontag, her legs sprawled across the table as she munched sandwiches and repartee with equal ferocity. </p>
<p>I barely knew Sontag when in a moment of rashness I agreed to speak about “dandyism” in a small seminar. Naively I had forgotten that Sontag wrote of dandyism in her iconic <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36436100-notes-on-camp?from_search=true">Notes on Camp</a>, and I suspect she was angered by my too easy equation of dandies with homosexuality. Susan turned her well-rehearsed wrath on me for what was self-evident fatuousness; I retired hurt; and Edmund took me to dinner, having seen others who had experienced Susan’s barbs. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=606&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=762&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=762&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/287306/original/file-20190808-144851-1yscw26.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=762&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Susan Sontag in 1979.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lynn Gilbert/Wikimedia Commons</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Looking back, I realise this was a rite of passage; some months later Susan and I went to dinner together, my main memory of which is a Lower East Side Chinese restaurant which specialised in offal, and a discussion which touched for a time on opera. </p>
<h2>Ferocious determination</h2>
<p>What I glimpsed that evening was something of the ferocious determination with which she was constructing herself as a cultural icon, a ferocity that seemed shared by so many of the people I came across in New York, where every transaction, even at the bank or post office, demanded concentrated ambition.</p>
<p>Occasionally I went to evenings at Sennett’s house, where men gathered around the piano, in an arch approximation of a Proustian salon, and Sennett spoke of his developing friendship with Michel Foucault.</p>
<p>There are echoes of those moments in both Sennett’s novel <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3727748-the-frog-who-dared-to-croak?from_search=true">The Frog Who Dared to Croak</a> (1982) and White’s <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/109720.Caracole?from_search=true">Caracole</a> (1985), the latter of which caused a celebrated split between him and Sontag, who recognised herself and her son, David Rieff, in the novel.</p>
<p>Many famous people passed through the Institute. I met Nadine Gordimer while I was trying to decide whether to return to Australia, and leave New York, self-evidently the centre of the gay literary world. “But there are no centres anymore,” said Gordimer, a great comfort to me when a year later I decided to return to Australia.</p>
<p>My first year in New York was taken up with the final edits and publication of the book that would become <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3669429-the-homosexualization-of-america">The Homosexualization of America</a>; “Better” Vito Russo, whose book <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/374224.The_Celluloid_Closet">The Celluloid Closet</a> remains a staple of queer film criticism, had said to me one day “To call it The Americanization of the Homosexual”, and in retrospect he was right. I worked on the book with Michael Denneny, the toughest and most demanding editor I’ve encountered. Of all the books I’ve written this one involved the most intense collaboration with an editor, Michael being even more determined than I that homosexuals were changing the shape of American culture.</p>
<p>The path to breaking down the massive silences around homosexuality, which viewed it as a crime or a pathology, was already far advanced before the hiatus of the AIDS epidemic. </p>
<p>That this was happening as mainstream politics moved to the right, symbolised by Reagan’s election in 1980, and the rise of the Moral Majority, reminds us that politics rarely move in a straight line. The references in Homosexualization to marriage seem to assume it is a dying institution, indeed claimed we were better off without it:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The absence of gay marriage means that it is easier for homosexuals to develop other ways of living than in conventional coupledom; there has been considerable discussion, in the new gay writings, of the advantages and disadvantages of a whole range of possible living and social arrangements. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>That discussion has now largely disappeared as same sex marriage has become a barometer of acceptance of sexual diversity. Even those of us who are sceptical of winning the blessings of the state and the church for our relationships felt the need to campaign for marriage equality when it became the subject of an unnecessary and expensive postal ballot two years ago.</p>
<p>It is easy to lament the apparent shift to conservatism of the queer movement, but this is an inevitable result of it now embracing far more people than it did 40 years ago. Nostalgia for a radical past too easily overlooks the range of ideas and identities that now exist, in a very different world to that of the early 1980s.</p>
<p>The marriage vote was significant, marking as it did a further step in acceptance of sexual diversity. On November 15 2017 thousands of us gathered outside the State Library to hear the results of the postal vote. The live feed from Canberra almost collapsed, but the figures came across clearly: over 60% of the 12 million people who responded had voted yes. There were cheers, speeches, rainbow flags, jubilation; a group of us went for coffee and prosecco to the Library café, where the staff were flirting their relief. Did I think, someone asked, that this was a moment when the zeitgeist shifted? </p>
<p>There have been many moments in my life when social attitudes towards homosexuality have shifted, and times when people have mobilised to create change: this was true of moves for decriminalisation in NSW and Tasmania, painfully real during the early years of the AIDS epidemic. The marriage vote felt like a major milestone, but I don’t think that the zeitgeist shifted, rather that several decades of slow shifts towards greater acceptance came together, and most Australians recognised this. Let’s hope the current government remembers this.</p>
<p><em>This is an edited extract from Unrequited Love: Diary of an Accidental Activist (Monash University Press)</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121506/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dennis Altman received funding from Monash University Press as advance for Unrequited Love</span></em></p>New York in the early 1980s was a time of literary salons, concentrated ambition and a flowering of gay cultural power.Dennis Altman, Professorial Fellow in Human Security, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1184702019-07-11T12:28:18Z2019-07-11T12:28:18ZHow a Hong Kong tax assessment decision could influence attitudes towards LGBT+ rights across Asia<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/283677/original/file-20190711-173342-drdi7w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/couple-gay-lgbt-concept-asia-smart-1285040218?studio=1">Anusak rojpeetipongsakorn/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Just days after same-sex marriage was legalised <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/24/taiwan-holds-first-gay-marriages-in-historic-day-for-asia">in neighbouring Taiwan</a>, Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal handed down its own landmark decision. A judgment which has – arguably – laid the first stones in the yellow brick road for further recognition and legalisation of same-sex marriage across Asia.</p>
<p>But the June 6 ruling was not a challenge against marriage laws in Hong Kong. It simply granted the application of spousal benefits and joint tax assessment to gay civil servant <a href="http://www.hklii.hk/eng/hk/cases/hkcfa/2019/19.html">Angus Leung</a> and his British husband Scott Adams, who were married in New Zealand in 2014. The significance of this case lies in the fact that it pierces the “Asian values” argument against same-sex marriage and relationships in the region. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/283675/original/file-20190711-173366-1b0ldms.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.epa.eu/crime-law-and-justice-photos/judiciary-system-of-justice-photos/court-of-final-appeal-rules-in-favor-of-lifelong-same-sex-couples-spousal-visas-photos-54464449">EPA-EFE/Jerome Favre</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This argument basically recognises Confucian values which sacrifice individual freedom in favour of filial piety, or loyalty towards family, corporation, government or nation. Though based on ancient principles, this particular set of values has been particularly promoted by political leaders and intellectuals since the late 20th century as an alternative to the Western ideals that some think are <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/people/features/ihavearightto/four_b/casestudy_art30.shtml">being imposed on the region</a>.</p>
<p>Resistance to changing LGBT+ rights across different Asian countries mostly centres on Asian values arguments. These “values” have been <a href="https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/how-southeast-asian-values-play-villain-to-lgbt-progress/#gs.ovy9wq">used repeatedly</a> in Asia to resist the so-called Western “postcolonialism” of LGBT+ rights. Malaysian prime minister <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyq4WuOEHHU&t=1s">Mahathir Mohamad</a>, for example – a promoter of Asian values during the 1990s – has repeatedly made comments similar to this from 2018: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>In Malaysia there are some things we cannot accept, even though it is seen as human rights in Western countries … We cannot accept LGBT marriage between men and men, women and women.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But by arriving at this decision the Hong Kong court has essentially pierced this argument. It pointed out that protection of the institution of heterosexual marriage is not the business of the state. The government’s job is to ensure “efficient administration of government” and “the raising of revenue through the taxation system”. Essentially, this confirms that differential treatment between same-sex and opposite-sex couples without justification in Hong Kong cannot be allowed, no matter what society’s “values” are.</p>
<h2>The problem with values</h2>
<p>The Asian values argument against same-sex marriage is based on the presumption that there is only one set of Asian values, the one endorsed by the ruling class. But this oversimplified view of society is far from reality – it would be a fallacy to assume that the cultures of Asian countries are stagnant and unchangeable. </p>
<p>In fact, the region has had sexual diversity for many centuries. Journalist Sarah Ngu has recently suggested (and <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J236v07n01_08">researchers have previously written</a>) that relationships between consenting same-sex adults have existed in China <a href="https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3011750/china-embraced-gay-marriage-long-taiwans-law-west-perverted">for thousands of years</a> – although whether same-sex marriage has ever been embraced in China is debatable. </p>
<p>Fortunately, not all believe the Asian values argument. Even Mahathir’s daughter, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKL_rHbuj_4">Marina</a>, has a somewhat different interpretation from her father of LGBT+ rights, thanks to her experience of working with the LGBT+ community in Malaysia. She argues that “LGBTs just want the same rights as everyone, nothing more”. </p>
<p>While it may take another couple of generations to shift views entirely across the region, already the argument based on cultural relativism against same-sex marriage is becoming less and less convincing. And moves like the one recently seen in Hong Kong are now happening in other Asian countries. In <a href="https://qz.com/1651298/ibaraki-is-the-first-prefecture-in-japan-to-recognize-same-sex-couples/">Japan</a>, gay and transgender partnerships are being increasingly recognised at regional levels. <a href="https://saigoneer.com/vietnam-news/10706-after-taiwan,-vietnam-among-asia-s-most-progressive-in-lgbt-rights">Vietnam</a> has repealed its heteronormative definition of marriage and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2017/05/25/after-same-sex-marriage-in-taiwan-spotlight-turns-to-this-asian-country/#59e7fcd73b4f">Thailand</a> became the first Asian country <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-lgbt-lawmaking-feature/gay-couples-to-live-more-freely-with-thai-civil-unions-idUSKCN1PX00E">to recognise same-sex civil partnerships</a> in early 2019.</p>
<h2>Influencing China</h2>
<p>While Hong Kong is a relatively small city, it is already home to many international marriages and intercultural relationships, straight and gay. The success of Leung and Adams perhaps comes as no surprise, but it could very well be a catalyst for LGBT+ rights reform in neighbouring China. </p>
<p>Following Taiwan’s legalisation of same-sex marriage, renowned Chinese scholar and activist <a href="http://phtv.ifeng.com/a/20170526/44626351_0.shtml">Li Yinhe</a> noted:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>People say the western sex culture is not like ours. Their social custom is not like ours. These are all excuses. If Taiwan can legalise same-sex marriage, then it proves that same-sex marriage can be accepted by Chinese culture and in Chinese societies.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>With this “if Taiwan can, so can we” attitude already changing the way some in China think, the Leung case may very well push the cause further. China’s increasing influence and more frequent and closer ties in the Pearl River Delta – the region where the Pearl River flows into the South China Sea, near Hong Kong which has become <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/may/10/china-pearl-river-delta-then-and-now-photographs">rapidly urbanised in recent decades</a> – will likely shift the country’s culture, and this will have a ripple effect across the whole of Asia. </p>
<p>While the Leung case may appear to be a simple tax ruling for Hong Kong, it could very well be a catalyst for a new chapter in LGBT+ rights across the whole continent.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118470/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erich Hou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While some argue that Western LGBT+ ideals have no place in Asia, a new ruling in Hong Kong shows that these values have no bearing on the law.Erich Hou, Lecturer in Law, University of South WalesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1107452019-02-28T11:41:07Z2019-02-28T11:41:07ZHow being beautiful influences your attitudes toward sex<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/260786/original/file-20190225-26174-mfvubs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Beauty can mean more opportunities – but can it also influence values?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/painting-male-portrait-oil-on-canvas-708034999?src=4_54FaVD-kL8jWYGZvrdng-2-69">Nataliass/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>People tend to feel strongly about matters of sexual morality, such as premarital sex or gay marriage. </p>
<p>Some sources of these differences are obvious. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508619.2011.557005">Religion</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.11.016">media portrayals</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00451.x">parents and peers</a> are big social forces that shape attitudes about sex.</p>
<p>But could something as innocuous as the way we look spark these different outlooks, too? In a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12544">recently published article</a>, I studied this question.</p>
<h2>Beauty and opportunity</h2>
<p>Compared with the rest of us, most beautiful people lead charmed lives.</p>
<p>Studies show that pretty people <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000340">tend to get favorable treatment</a>. They secure better jobs and earn higher salaries. Others are friendlier toward them. With this extra money and social support, they’re better equipped to fend off any consequences of their actions. For instance, the better-looking can get <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01552.x">more benefit of the doubt from juries</a>. </p>
<p>Their lives are most charmed, though, in matters of sex and romance. While many benefits of beauty are small – a slightly higher salary offer here, a better performance evaluation there – the romantic benefits are larger and more consistent. Good-looking people on average have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.014">more sexual opportunities and partners</a>. </p>
<p>Could this create a sense, among attractive people, that anything goes when it comes to sex? Could it make them less inclined <a href="https://mic.com/articles/54313/the-value-placed-on-virginity-is-one-of-history-s-biggest-travesties#.J3MWGtyOM">to value sexual purity</a>? And might sexually experienced people belittle the moral costs of sex in order to feel better about their own past conduct?</p>
<p>If so, we would expect good-looking people to be the most tolerant ones where sex is concerned. They would have less restrictive views on issues like premarital sex, abortion or gay marriage.</p>
<h2>A link to conservatism?</h2>
<p>But you could also argue the opposite. </p>
<p>Higher salaries and greater success in the job market might pull good-looking people toward more conservative views when it comes to taxes or economic justice. </p>
<p>Since conservatives, on average, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02489.x">dislike sexual freedom more than liberals do</a>, identifying with conservatives for economic reasons – or simply moving in conservative social circles – might make the beautiful less, not more, tolerant where sex is concerned. Along these lines, studies have found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.12.008">good looks are associated with conservatism</a> among politicians. </p>
<p>Attractiveness could then plausibly associate with higher or lower standards for what sexual activities are morally acceptable. Or the two arguments could cancel each other out, as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9075-x">one study of college students</a> suggested.</p>
<h2>Digging into the surveys</h2>
<p>To further explore this issue, I turned to two large, prominent surveys of Americans’ views: the <a href="https://www.gss.norc.org/">General Social Survey</a> from 2016 and the <a href="https://electionstudies.org/">American National Election Studies</a> from 1972. </p>
<p>Both surveys were administered face-to-face. And, unusually, both studies asked the person administering the survey to evaluate the respondent’s looks on a one-to-five scale. (The respondent doesn’t see the score. The study’s designers weren’t that heedless of social awkwardness.)</p>
<p>This measure of beauty isn’t rigorous. But it does resemble quick personal judgments made in everyday life. Moreover, the decades-long gap between the studies gives some sense of whether effects persist across a generation’s worth of cultural change.</p>
<p>The surveys also asked about legal and moral standards relevant to sex, such as how restrictive abortion laws should be, whether gay marriage should be legal and about the acceptability of premarital, extramarital and gay sex.</p>
<p>In both studies, the better-looking seem more relaxed about sexual morality. For instance, in the data from 2016, 51 percent of those whose looks were rated above average said a woman who wants an abortion for any reason should legally be allowed to have one. Only 42 percent of those with below-average looks said the same. This nine-point difference increases to 15 points when accounting for factors like age, education, political ideology and religiosity.</p>
<p>This pattern repeated for almost all questions. The one exception was a question that asked when adultery was morally acceptable. Almost all respondents said “never” to that, washing out differences between the more and less attractive.</p>
<h2>Are morals opportunistic?</h2>
<p>If past experience is what makes beautiful people more tolerant toward issues like abortion and gay marriage, we would not expect them to be notably more tolerant about matters in which looks don’t apply. This proves to be true. Good-looking respondents in these surveys aren’t detectably more open, for example, to a legal right to die or to accepting civil disobedience.</p>
<p>These results are consistent with other findings showing that getting away with violating norms can make you more casual about those norms in the future. Whether in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34111-8_5">white-collar crime</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ecpo.12102">police violence</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/2642034">international human-rights violations</a>, those who pull off one questionable action often become more willing to justify doing the same, or perhaps even a little more, in the future.</p>
<p>The same could be said for sex. If you’ve have a lot of sexual experiences in the past, it may color your attitudes toward the vast range of sexual possibilities – even those that don’t directly apply to your own sexuality or personal experience.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110745/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Urbatsch does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Beautiful people tend to lead more charmed lives. Could their attractiveness also color their views on issues like abortion, premarital sex and gay marriage?Robert Urbatsch, Associate Professor of Political Science, Iowa State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1049302018-11-15T00:06:53Z2018-11-15T00:06:53ZRainbow pride flag’s still flying, taking on new forms and meanings in our cities<p>A year ago, on November 15, the Australian Bureau of Statistics <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/1800.0">announced</a> the result of the postal survey on same-sex marriage equality, a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/15/australia-says-yes-to-same-sex-marriage-in-historic-postal-survey">resounding Yes</a> with 61.6% of the vote. Leading up to the announcement, the LBGTQIA+ community endured agonised tension. They had to argue fiercely for the legitimacy of their relationships as well as their identities.</p>
<p>During that debate a new visual landscape of signs and interventions became part of many urban environments. The rainbow pride flag began to appear at both public and private sites as a very visible sign of pride and affirmation.</p>
<p>In the past year the flag has clearly escaped the pole or the street bunting of pride festival times to become ever present. Post-plebiscite, we are reminded of the same-sex marriage vote, and that issues for queer people continue. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-year-since-the-marriage-equality-vote-much-has-been-gained-and-there-is-still-much-to-be-done-106326">A year since the marriage equality vote, much has been gained – and there is still much to be done</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://www.biography.com/people/gilbert-baker-112517">Gilbert Baker</a> originally designed the rainbow flag in 1978 for the San Francisco Pride Parade. Its purpose was to express the visibility and values of the gay and lesbian community. The flag’s colours represent healing, serenity, sex and nature. </p>
<p>Since then, the flag has undergone many remixes by different parts of the queer community to create further visibility for the diversity inherent in it. </p>
<p>Transgender woman and activist Monica Helms designed the transgender pride flag in 1999, retaining the stripe motif, but focusing on blue, pink and white to illustrate a spectrum of gender. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UJ-Rq3Bl_UY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Monica Helms talks about designing the trans pride flag.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A more recent design is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansexual_pride_flag">pansexual pride flag</a>, designed by a Tumblr user known as Jasper in 2010. First disseminated on the site, it has become the most widely seen specific flag of the community, reused across the internet. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-it-mean-to-be-cisgender-103159">Explainer: what does it mean to be 'cisgender'?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What’s in a flag?</h2>
<p>Cloth flags are significant cultural spatial markers. Affected by air, wind and light, static cloth is transformed in the slightest breeze, becoming alive and suggesting change as well as permanence. </p>
<p>The rainbow pride flag’s emphatic stripes activate a sense of colour and change, evoking new narratives and possibilities. The flag took on new cultural, social and political meaning as it moved from the air and onto homes and commercial premises.</p>
<p>Some flags, like one hung in the window of The Bank pub in Newtown, were emblazoned with YES in the centre. This left no questions about what the flag was supposed to represent – it was very specific about its contemporary political motivation. </p>
<p>An example of the flag leaving the fixed place of the pole is at 73 Liberty Street in Stanmore in Sydney’s inner west. Originally painted a shade of yellow beige, the house was transformed into a radiant spectrum of rainbow pride colours, with a black and white flag emblazoned with “Yes!” hung on the front. Visit it today and the colours remain as vibrant as ever.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245176/original/file-20181112-194509-14i42f8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">73 Liberty Street in Stanmore.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tom Stoddard</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The boldness of the flag’s colours radically alters the experience of moving past the generally bland facades of inner-city Sydney. We are now confronted by an eye-catching spectrum, the aesthetic energy of colour and space. </p>
<p>Bold colour, often spurned and even banned in some heritage suburbs such as <a href="https://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/150530/Chapter_C1_Paddington_HCA.pdf">Paddington</a>, takes on a new uplifting vision. At stake is visibility. LGBTQIA+ communities do not appear and disappear at moments of political debates, but continue to actualise and make visible pride in their existence. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/coming-out-at-work-is-not-a-one-off-event-101118">Coming out at work is not a one-off event</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A politicised existence necessitates this, as the fight for equality is ongoing. The painted house is a visible urban marker that the queer community is here to stay.</p>
<p>So what is the significance of these persistent visual markers? On the one hand, their visual presence indicates the importance of a political debate undertaken more than one year ago. </p>
<p>More subtly it marks a cultural shift, where expression, be it personal or as a collective, affirms a community. Design and activism in these forms can become expressions of civic values, as space and place become the mouthpiece for cultural and social sentiments and statements.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=237&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/245184/original/file-20181113-194519-ko9asd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=298&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The flag leaves the pole: stickers around Marrickville, Sydney.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Tom Stoddard</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That isn’t to say that the static flag does not possess power in its own right. Various activist-designers have transformed it into other forms that create direct dialogues with the public. The rainbow flag stripes become a framing device for statements and declarations that are intrinsically tied to the language of the debate. </p>
<p>Stickers have long been used as spatially flexible political objects, free from flagpoles or other prerequisite structures. From letterboxes to window frames, remixed versions of the flag take a message or sentiment to any place, public or private. </p>
<p>This rethinking of the hierarchy of designated spaces for communication is an exciting evolution for the form and intention of the rainbow pride flag. As it evolves from one icon into a variety of others, it populates the city with queer statements and traces. </p>
<p>Last year the pride flag was used as an effective rallying call to express outwardly, publicly and explicitly that same-sex relationships (marriage or otherwise) are as valid as any heterosexual relationship. It will be interesting to see where the pride flag takes the Australian queer community next and, in turn, where the community takes the flag.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104930/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Stoddard works for the University of Technology Sydney and receives funding and support for his research and writing.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Lee works for the University of Technology Sydney and at times receives funding and support for his research and writing. </span></em></p>In the year since the resounding Yes vote in the same-sex marriage survey, the flag has clearly escaped the pole or the street bunting of pride festival times to become ever present in our cities.Thomas Stoddard, PhD Candidate, School of Design, University of Technology SydneyTom Lee, Senior Lecturer, School of Design, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1037022018-10-14T10:37:05Z2018-10-14T10:37:05ZWhy same-sex marriage is not the ultimate tool for queer liberation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/239678/original/file-20181008-72130-1vfl1q7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There must be a queerer way to think about marriage.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Felipe Trueba/EPA</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Is same-sex marriage a valid option for gay and lesbian people? In my research I am among those who have <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282773508_A_critical_engagement_Analysing_same-sex_marriage_discourses_in_To_Have_and_to_Hold_The_Making_of_Same-Sex_Marriage_in_South_Africa_2008_-_A_queer_perspective">vociferously argued</a> about the pitfalls of same-sex marriage. I, and others like me, voice our apprehensions in the original radical spirit of “queer”. We look at something that seems so right and interrogate it in a strange or odd way. </p>
<p>These voices are muted and their opinions struggle to emerge in popular discourses about same-sex marriage because they are incorrectly thrown into the homophobic pot.</p>
<p>It is vital to make room for “queer” ideas about same-sex marriage. “Queer” refers to anyone who is at odds with the norm and who resists the mostly white middle class stereotype of “the family”. </p>
<p>Among the papers I’ve written on this issue, <a href="https://scholar.google.co.za/citations?user=F5mELTgAAAAJ&hl=en#d=gs_md_cita-d&p=&u=%2Fcitations%3Fview_op%3Dview_citation%26hl%3Den%26user%3DF5mELTgAAAAJ%26citation_for_view%3DF5mELTgAAAAJ%3A_Qo2XoVZTnwC%26tzom%3D-120">one</a> is triggered by the fact that the legalisation of same-sex marriage in South Africa in 2006 was greeted as a euphoric victory for numerous gay and lesbian people and this victory was documented in the <a href="http://www.jacana.co.za/fanele-73640/to-have-and-to-hold-detail">2008 book</a> <em>To Have and to Hold: The Making of Same-Sex Marriage in South Africa</em>. </p>
<p>The editors of the volume argue that the various stakeholders who supported same-sex marriage “adequately interrogated the role and function of marriage”. I put this claim to the test and conclude that, rather than opening a space for the “recognition of diverse sexualities and relationship forms”, the Civil Union Act is limited to those people who self-identify as gay or lesbian. </p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00020184.2019.1584484">new paper</a>, I argue that the literature on same-sex marriage in South Africa before and after the passing of the Civil Union Act 2006, while acknowledging queer critique, resolves such critique in favour of the “right” to marry. I also argue for the necessity for a queer anti-homophobic critique of same-sex marriage to broaden debates about recognition.</p>
<p>There is much to be learned from the many versions of “nonstandard” families in South Africa, where I live and conduct my research. These versions are not based in the myth of marriage and all that entails: the monogamy, the children, the picket fence and the respectability. A person needs only to look around exactly where they are and they will see how diversely people choose to live their lives. </p>
<p>And yet the idea that same-sex marriage is somehow a form of liberation is carried through in the vast majority of popular writing, including that <a href="https://theconversation.com/africa/search?adapter=pg2&date=all&language=en&q=same+sex+marriage&sort=relevancy">by academics</a>. But there is actually a large amount of anti-homophobic academic and everyday writing from thinkers and activists that probes the numerous problems associated with same-sex marriage.</p>
<p>Perhaps the problem is that by questioning same-sex marriage you it could mean that you’re automatically a homophobe. However, the under-represented voices I’m referring to here are certainly not homophobic. Many are queer. </p>
<h2>Queer ideas</h2>
<p>One of the problems with same-sex marriage is that it is, by definition, very limited. It only refers to self-identified gay and lesbian people and this runs against the contemporary grain of society at large which is slowly coming to terms with the fact that identity could be flexible.</p>
<p>The other problem is that the many rewards of marriage are only available to married gay and lesbian married people. Why can’t all these delicious rewards be available to all people regardless of their marital status. </p>
<p>And finally, the fierce pro-same-sex marriage debates that are happening all over the world are so loud that they have drowned out centuries of critical <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4416225.pdf">feminist perspectives</a> and activism on marriage.</p>
<p>Marriage is the place where <a href="http://archive.organizingupgrade.com/index.php/modules-menu/beyond-capitalism/item/1002-marriage-will-never-set-us-free">the state regulates</a> the family, gender, race and patriarchy. How on earth did these truths get sidelined for a stamp of approval? Radical feminist Paula Ettelbrick <a href="https://www.nationalists.org/library/misc/marriage-path-to-liberation.html">asked</a> more than 20 years ago:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Since when is marriage a path to liberation?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But for many, same-sex marriage is a path to liberation; it is claimed by pro same -sex marriage activists that this act has the potential to transform the institutions of both marriage and gender. </p>
<p>The reality, as social theorist Michael Warner has <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books/about/The_Trouble_with_Normal.html?id=nvPEDrScjmAC&redir_esc=y">argued</a>, is that married gay and lesbian people are just as likely to</p>
<blockquote>
<p>divorce, cheat, and abuse each other as anyone else. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>And, rather than being a path to liberation, same-sex marriage provides the perfect tool for the state to control and monitor who is and who is not respectable.</p>
<h2>“Marriage” beyond the state</h2>
<p>So what would a queer re-imagining of marriage look like? Nothing. That’s because the most powerful way to oppose marriage is simply to not get married. </p>
<p>Philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler <a href="https://books.google.co.za/books?id=UfCTAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&dq=rework+and+revise+the+social+organisation+of+friendship,+sexual+contacts,+and+community+to+produce+non-state-centered+forms+of+support+and+alliance&source=bl&ots=BuI9OiodFe&sig=YalnCc8FVCDk6svw-4L7LBxJYV8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjV-fLToPbdAhWBAcAKHeIfC50Q6AEwB3oECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=rework%20and%20revise%20the%20social%20organisation%20of%20friendship%2C%20sexual%20contacts%2C%20and%20community%20to%20produce%20non-state-centered%20forms%20of%20support%20and%20alliance&f=false">noted that</a> the task at hand should be to “rework and revise the social organisation of friendship, sexual contacts, and community to produce non-state-centered forms of support and alliance”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103702/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>TL McCormick does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It is vital to make room for “queer” ideas about same-sex marriage.TL McCormick, Lecturer of Applied Linguistics, University of JohannesburgLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1031982018-09-17T10:52:07Z2018-09-17T10:52:07ZAs Cuba backs gay marriage, churches oppose the government’s plan<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236240/original/file-20180913-177959-1lcg666.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">As gay Cubans gain more rights, opposition is also growing.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Desmond Boylan</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/cuba-prepara-el-camino-a-la-legalizacion-del-matrimonio-gay-y-las-iglesias-rompen-su-silencio-102220">Leer en español</a>.</em></p>
<p>Cubans are debating a <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/08/cuba-proposes-biggest-constitutional-reform-decades-180814093108107.html">constitutional reform</a> that, among other legal changes, would open the door to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/23/cubas-new-constitution-paves-way-for-same-sex-marriage">gay marriage</a>. It would also prohibit discrimination against people based on sex, gender, sexual orientation and gender identity in the communist nation. </p>
<p>The proposed new <a href="http://media.cubadebate.cu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/2018_07_25-21_10-Tabloide-Constituci%C3%B3n-sin-precio-BN.pdf">Constitution</a>, drafted by a special commission within Cuba’s National Assembly, was <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-44971445">unveiled in July</a>. If the National Assembly and <a href="https://theconversation.com/cubas-new-president-what-to-expect-of-miguel-diaz-canel-95187">President Miguel Díaz-Canel</a> approve the document after a Feb. 24, 2019 public referendum, marriage would be defined as a “union between two people.” </p>
<p>Cuba’s <a href="http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/cuba.htm">1976 Constitution</a>, known as the Carta Magna, defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. And it does not fully protect private enterprise, freedom of association or allows for same-sex marriage – despite <a href="https://theconversation.com/castros-conundrum-finding-a-post-communist-model-cuba-can-follow-81242">growing social acceptance and political tolerance for such rights</a>.</p>
<p>Emigrés who retain Cuban nationality have been invited to participate in Cuba’s public debate on the constitutional reform – though not to vote on it – via a <a href="https://constitucion.minrex.gob.cu">digital forum</a> run by the Foreign Ministry – a level of citizen outreach that’s “<a href="https://twitter.com/SoberonGuzman/status/1025405043682492416">unprecedented</a>” in Cuba, says Ernesto Soberón, the ministry’s director of consular affairs and Cubans residing overseas. </p>
<h2>Cuba’s political process opens up</h2>
<p>This lively, broad-based debate is a sign of how much Cuba – a main subject of <a href="https://vimeo.com/145156796">my research</a> as a <a href="https://sjcny.academia.edu/Mar%C3%ADaIsabelAlfonso/CurriculumVitae">professor of literature and cultural studies</a> – has <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-cuba-the-post-fidel-era-began-ten-years-ago-71720">changed</a> in recent years. </p>
<p>President Raúl Castro, who took over for his ailing older brother Fidel <a href="https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/fidel-castro-en/article117213333.html">in 2006</a>, began to open Cuba’s economy to foreign investment and normalized diplomatic relations with the United States, which has <a href="https://www.state.gov/e/eb/tfs/spi/cuba/">maintained its economic embargo on the Communist island since 1962</a>. </p>
<p>Raúl Castro also worked with President Barack Obama to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/when-president-obama-moved-to-normalize-relations-with-cuba/2017/12/11/35c86772-c326-11e7-84bc-5e285c7f4512_story.html">ease some economic restrictions</a> on Cuba.</p>
<p>Castro <a href="https://theconversation.com/cubas-new-president-what-to-expect-of-miguel-diaz-canel-95187">stepped down</a> in April 2018, handing power over to the much younger Díaz-Canel.</p>
<p>Cuba has moderately amended its <a href="http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/cuba.htm">Carta Magna</a> just three times. A <a href="http://bohemia.cu/historia/2018/06/en-que-consistio-la-primera-reforma-a-la-constitucion-de-1976/">1978 constitutional reform</a> created an official channel for youth political participation, for example, while that of 1992 liberalized <a href="http://www.temas.cult.cu/sites/default/files/articulos_academicos_en_pdf/16%20Mesa%20constit.pdf">elements of Cuba’s socialist economic model</a> to revitalize Cuba’s economy.</p>
<p>Today’s proposed reform is <a href="http://www.granma.cu/cuba/2018-07-05/diez-puntos-clave-de-la-actual-reforma-constitucional-en-cuba-05-07-2018-17-07-53">a complete overhaul</a>. It would add 87 articles, change 113 and eliminate 13, even a section of Article 5 affirming Cuba’s “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/22/cuba-ditches-aim-of-building-communism-from-draft-constitution">advance toward a Communist society</a>.”</p>
<p>Beyond legalizing gay marriage, the new Constitution would protect private property, limit the presidential term to five years and introduce the role of prime minister. </p>
<p>Intense debate has surrounded the possibility of marriage equality in Cuba, and not just within the government’s <a href="http://www.europapress.es/internacional/noticia-comienza-cuba-debate-publico-modernizacion-constitucion-20180814005647.html">official public meetings</a>. Cubans are also discussing and debating gay marriage with neighbors and friends, in the streets and online – a departure from Cuba’s traditionally <a href="http://www.themarknews.com/2015/01/08/no-es-facil-threats-and-opportunities-in-cuba-u-s-relations/">more top-down style of government</a>.</p>
<h2>The rise of gay rights in Cuba</h2>
<p>Cuba’s nascent LGBTQ rights movement also began under Raúl Castro, thanks in large part to the leadership of <a href="http://www.washingtonblade.com/2017/05/02/mariela-castro-says-father-supportive-pro-lgbt-efforts/">his daughter Mariela Castro</a>, a National Assembly member and president of the semi-governmental <a href="http://www.cenesex.org/construccion/">Centro Nacional de Educación Sexual</a>, founded in 1987 to advance sexual awareness in Cuba. </p>
<p>A lack of opinion polling makes it difficult to measure Cuban public support for gay marriage. But acceptance of homosexuality, both within the government and in civil society, has grown appreciably.</p>
<p>During the 1960s and 1970s, homosexuality was considered incompatible with Cuba’s <a href="http://www.jornada.com.mx/2010/08/31/mundo/026e1mun">model of the revolutionary man</a>: atheist, heterosexual and anti-bourgeoisie. Gay people, active Christians and others who defied these ideals were sent to <a href="https://jovencuba.com/2012/02/10/quinquenio-gris-la-umap/comment-page-2/">military work camps</a> to “strengthen” their revolutionary character.</p>
<p>Today, the Cuban government appears to accept homosexuality as part of socialist society. In 2008 the National Assembly approved a law <a href="http://www.ipsnoticias.net/2008/06/salud-cuba-se-aprueban-operaciones-de-cambio-de-sexo/">allowing sexual reasignment surgery</a>.</p>
<p>La Habana holds annual marches against homophobia and transphobia and cities across the island celebrate the <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/cubans-show-lgbtq-pride-flags-dancing-havana-parade-n873746">Gay Pride parade</a>. </p>
<h2>The church emerges as an opposition force</h2>
<p>But legacies of intolerance remain.</p>
<p>The Assembly of God Pentecostal Church, the Evangelical League and the Methodist Church of Cuba, among other Christian churches, have issued a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1571539782969501&set=a.187453318044828&type=3&theater">joint statement</a> opposing gay marriage. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=709&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=709&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=709&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236231/original/file-20180913-177962-76lxc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Traditionally, religion has taken a back seat to politics in Cuba.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Cristobal Herrera</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Their public letter, published on June 8, argues that such “gender ideology” has “nothing whatsoever to do with our culture, our independence struggles nor with the historic leaders of the Revolution.”</p>
<p>Cuba is a <a href="https://oncubamagazine.com/sociedad/nada-ajeno-la-constitucion-la-laicidad-partido/">secular country</a> where political ideology has historically trumped religion. Religious opposition to a government proposal is rare.</p>
<p>It is even more unusual for the church to attempt to mobilize the Cuban public, as some Christian leaders are trying to do now. </p>
<p>According to the Cuban magazine <a href="http://www.lajiribilla.cu/articulo/campana-callejera-en-la-habana-contra-matrimonios-homosexuales">La Jiribilla</a>, preachers on the streets have been handing out fliers saying gay marriage defies God’s “<a href="https://www.facebook.com/iglecuba/photos/a.420045238065098/1802367976499477/?type=3&theater">original design</a>” for the family. </p>
<h2>LBGTQ activists answer</h2>
<p>Gay rights groups and feminists are <a href="https://asambleafeminista.wordpress.com/2018/07/23/luces-para-un-desembarco-fundamentalismo-religioso-en-cuba/">responding</a> with a creative show of force. </p>
<p>Clandestina, Cuba’s first online store, and the tattoo studio <a href="http://lamarcabodyart.com/">La Marca</a> are spearheading a campaign called “<a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10216143757807924&set=a.10200604835184570&type=3&theater">Cuban design</a>,” celebrating a “very original family” – phrasing that rebuts Christian claims about God’s design.</p>
<p>“More than anything, this is an issue of free expression,” Roberto Ramos Mori, of La Marca, said in an email. “The way to push back against hate is calmly, with intelligence – and, of course, humor.” </p>
<p>Cubans with internet access use the hashtag <a href="https://www.facebook.com/search/str/%23mifamiliaesoriginal/stories-keyword/stories-public">#mifamiliaesoriginal</a> to signal their support for LGBTQ rights on social media. </p>
<p>The church’s powerful opposition to marriage equality reflects a strategy commonly deployed across Latin America, <a href="https://asambleafeminista.wordpress.com/2018/07/23/luces-para-un-desembarco-fundamentalismo-religioso-en-cuba/">says the Cuban feminist</a> Ailynn Torres Santana. </p>
<p>Catholic and evangelical groups in Ecuador used similar language, for example, to <a href="http://www.conferenciaepiscopal.ec/index.php/comunicados-y-boletines/721-carta-abierta">oppose a 2017 law</a> allowing citizens to <a href="https://oig.cepal.org/sites/default/files/2018_ecu_leyintegralprevencionerradicacionviolenciagenero.pdf">choose their own gender identifier</a>, she says. In response to the legislation – which recognized gender as “a binary that is socially and culturally created, patriarchal and heteronormative” – churches called for “citizens to live in harmony with nature.”</p>
<p>Similar scenes played out when both <a href="http://www.pikaramagazine.com/2016/12/la-mentira-de-la-ideologia-de-genero-en-la-paz-de-colombia/">Colombia</a> and <a href="https://www.actuall.com/familia/nueve-diez-brasilenos-rechaza-la-ideologia-genero-las-escuelas/">Brazil</a> advanced LGBTQ rights, with Christian groups dismissing any attempt to change traditional gender roles as the “result” of what they pejoratively call “<a href="https://peru21.pe/lima/debes-tenerle-miedo-ideologia-genero-234797">gender ideology</a>.”</p>
<h2>What’s next for Cuba</h2>
<p>Gay marriage is not the only battlefield for Cuba’s newly empowered churches.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/el-flagelo-del-aborto-ilegal-en-america-latina-hay-democracia-sin-derechos-reproductivos-82945">Abortion</a>, illegal in <a href="https://theconversation.com/argentina-rejects-legal-abortion-and-not-all-catholics-are-celebrating-101346">most of Latin America</a>, has been a woman’s right in Cuba since 1965. Traditionally, not even Cuba’s Catholic church publicly opposed it.</p>
<p>Recently, though, Christians in Cuba have begun publicly <a href="http://www.ipsnoticias.net/2017/08/el-derecho-al-aborto-en-cuba-encara-nuevos-retos-50-anos-despues/">advocating</a> against <a href="https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=278483742927287&id=100022969907193">abortion</a>.</p>
<p>If conservative religious groups manage to prevent gay marriage in Cuba, I believe it would be a setback for social progress on the island.</p>
<p>But the mere existence of alternative voices in Cuba’s public sphere – including that of its churches – is, itself, proof that the country has already changed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103198/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>María Isabel Alfonso is co-founder of the not-for-profit group Cuban Americans For Engagement, which works to improve diplomatic relations between Cuba and the United States.</span></em></p>Cuba is avowedly secular. But as the country debates a new Constitution that would protect LGBT rights, churches have come out strongly against gay marriage — a sign of change on the Communist island.María Isabel Alfonso, Professor of Spanish , St. Joseph's College of New YorkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1019992018-09-17T09:25:31Z2018-09-17T09:25:31ZThere’s a problem with the LGBT rights movement – it’s limiting freedom<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236196/original/file-20180913-177965-2to1sy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=34%2C29%2C3888%2C2502&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/rainbow-flag-lgbt-movement-on-sky-563925979?src=NKdZt6DFQyRIyp80v805Lg-1-15">Miroslav110/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Earlier this month, a colonial era law criminalising gay sex in India was declared <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-indian-judges-wrote-love-into-law-as-they-decriminalised-gay-sex-102810">unconstitutional</a>. The Supreme Court ruled that the law violated an individual’s rights to privacy, equality and dignity. </p>
<p>There is no doubt that persecuted sexual minorities have suffered the most egregious forms of discrimination, harassment and violence based on gender identity, sexual orientation or preference. They have been considered less human and at times even non-human. Their lives when lost, have often been thought unworthy of being mourned. The conferment of rights, therefore, brings about a recognition of humanity and humanness. Such a moment produces a catharsis born of decades of struggle, resistance and hardship.</p>
<p>While these judicial and legal victories are obviously to be lauded, such events also require a moment of reflection. Because although such human rights victories are beyond doubt cause for celebration, often this celebration can blind us to the potential of alternative paths of action. And this, <a href="https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gender-alterity-and-human-rights">I think</a>, is true of all human rights causes. </p>
<p>There is a growing academic field of <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-we-need-human-rights-law-92242">criticism of the human rights agenda</a> that points to how the promise of freedom through human rights often remains unrealised. The accumulation of more rights has not necessarily resulted in more equality or more freedom, despite decades of activism and advocacy. </p>
<h2>Seeking the conventional</h2>
<p>In many countries where homosexuality has been decriminalised, LGBT advocacy has focused its attentions on the demand for same-sex marriage laws, legal adoption, parenthood, and further down that road, rights to divorce and custody. The global LGBT human rights movement, in other words, has directed its energies at legal inclusion and the bestowal of equal rights on stigmatised sexual groups. </p>
<p>This suggests that the end goal for all LGBT people remains the pursuit of aspirations sanctioned by a heterosexual regime. This implies that to feel treated as normal, equal, and to achieve a stable sense of social belonging, heterosexual norms are sought out. In this way, same-sex marriage becomes the ultimate validation of LGBT advocacy. </p>
<p>This urge for assimilation into arrangements such as marriage and the right to have children are, in some ways, problematic. These pursuits prompt several questions. Is it necessarily true, say, that these new rights have produced more freedom for all members of these once marginalised and maligned sexual minorities? I’m not so sure. Can true freedom and humanity be acquired through the mimicking of heterosexual lives? And do heterosexuals think their lives are worth mimicking, given how marriage has become increasingly unappealing and replaced by less formal arrangements?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=544&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=544&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236199/original/file-20180913-177956-tqa6nd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=544&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Marriage may not be the answer for everyone.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/closeup-newlywed-gay-couple-dancing-on-699255889?src=Qse0iral4SoYnAtXe6Abaw-1-1">Rawpixel/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As Judith Butler <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo7o2LYATDc">has mentioned</a>, these arrangements can, in fact, be experienced as violent for non-conforming genders and sexualities. She asks us to think about “how difficult it is for sissy boys or tomboys to function socially without being bullied, or without being teased, or without sometimes suffering threats of violence” because they are regarded as not normal or not conforming.</p>
<p>These dominant arrangements can also marginalise other histories and experiences of sexuality. For example, Ajaz Ahmed Bund, an LGBT activist in Kashmir (India), has <a href="https://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/the-interviews-blog/kashmiri-lgbt-movement-is-nascent-homophobia-in-islamic-society-is-more-cultural-and-less-religious/">described how</a> “same-sex dynamics of many varieties are an integral part of Islamic history and culture”. There is a rich archive of indigenous and non-liberal philosophical ways to live and be free in the world that are “not rooted in the Western European ideals”. We should have an understanding of human rights that is shaped by those ideals.</p>
<p>The struggle for gay rights has also been used to pinkwash other hidden agendas, including justifying military interventions and civilising missions, mostly targeting the non-West. In 2015, for example, the UN Security Council <a href="https://geneva.usmission.gov/2015/08/25/un-security-council-holds-inaugural-meeting-on-lgbt-issues/">met to discuss</a> the ongoing persecution of LGBT Syrians and Iraqis in ISIS held areas. The inaugural meeting was <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/25/lgbt-rights-un-security-council_n_8036098.html">applauded</a>, marking the first time in the council’s 70-year history it had acted in support of gay rights. Yet what is obscured by the haze of jubilation is how these rights were framed within the logic of security. This not only reinforces racial and cultural stereotypes – Islam more generally is projected as primitive and homophobic – but also in the process justifies violent military intervention.</p>
<h2>Radical freedom</h2>
<p>A closer scrutiny of human rights interventions, then, reveals how they not only incorporate LGBT people into a dominant sexual, gender and cultural order, but also can end up reinforcing a neo-imperial, racist and often militaristic project. In this view, human rights can be considered to be a regulatory and governance endeavour that produces a “tolerable homosexual” rather than a project that moves in the direction of lasting freedom or bringing about a radical transformation of the sexual order.</p>
<p>There is a need to reflect on other alternative modes of living. Exploring indigenous or unconventional ways of living that demonstrate the rich and varied ways in which marginalised religious, sexual and racial subgroups have lived and experienced freedom can provide human rights with a more expansive understanding of freedom. </p>
<p>Such alternatives might include the example of the 14th century female Sufi mystic and poet <a href="https://penguin.co.in/book/poetry/i-lalla/">Lal Ded</a>, who turned away from marriage and procreation to search for unconditional love and freedom through a spiritual quest. Or adherents of the Islamic veil, some of whom see the veil as integrally connected to an inner journey to greater self-awareness in all areas of life and piety. Such explorations open up the possibility of seeking freedom beyond the mainstream and keeping alive the promise of human rights as radical tools of transformation.</p>
<p>So while it remains crucial to celebrate the inclusion of LGBT people, and to affirm the terrain of rights acquired through activist heroism and sacrifice, it is equally critical to question the logic underlying the acquisition of such rights and its outcomes. When marriage, parenthood, and material success become the ultimate preoccupation, one is left wondering whether, somewhere along the way, freedom became a central casualty in the pursuit of these human rights.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101999/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ratna Kapur does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Although human rights victories are beyond doubt cause for celebration, often we are blinded to the potential of alternative paths of action.Ratna Kapur, Visiting Professor of Law, Queen Mary University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1030522018-09-12T19:09:42Z2018-09-12T19:09:42ZIndia’s sodomy ban, now ruled illegal, was a British colonial legacy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236026/original/file-20180912-133898-1h4h27s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hindu texts from thousands of years ago demonstrate acceptance of a 'third gender.' Today, transgender Indians, or hijras, remain visible members of society.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Bikas Das</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Indian Supreme Court has <a href="http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=201592">legalized homosexuality</a>, overturning a 157-year ban on consensual gay sex.</p>
<p>In a nearly 500-page unanimous <a href="https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2016/14961/14961_2016_Judgement_06-Sep-2018.pdf">decision</a> issued on Sept. 6, India’s highest court affirmed that “whenever the constitutional courts come across a situation of transgression or dereliction in the sphere of fundamental rights which are also the basic human rights of a section, howsoever small part of the society, then it is for the constitutional courts to ensure that constitutional morality prevails over social morality.”</p>
<p>Gay rights advocates <a href="https://psmag.com/news/viewfinder-celebrating-indias-landmark-lgbt-victory">worldwide</a> celebrated the legal victory, which came after nearly a decade of contentious <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/opinion/indias-reversal-on-gay-rights.html">court battles</a> against a <a href="https://factly.in/tracing-the-history-of-ipc-section-377/">British colonial law criminalizing homosexual acts</a>. </p>
<p>“Our court, our justice system, really believes in the rights of the people,” <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Nazfoundationindiatrust/">said</a> Kalyani Subramanyam, program director for the Naz Foundation, the primary petitioner in the court case, which could <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/06/asia/india-gay-sex-ruling-intl/index.html">open the door to gay marriage</a>.</p>
<p>And the ruling is more than a human rights win. It is also a restoration of ancient Indian sexual norms.</p>
<h2>India, homosexuality and the ‘third gender’</h2>
<p>In that way, India’s ruling differs from recent court decisions legalizing gay marriage in <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/02/06/latin-america-could-lead-way-lgbt-rights-2018">Colombia</a>, <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/05/24/first-asia-taiwan-legalize-same-sex-marriage">Taiwan</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41460032">Germany</a> – though for LGBTQ Indians, the impacts may be similarly life-changing. </p>
<p>Sexual and gender minorities in India are regularly <a href="http://www.ijims.com/uploads/cae8049d138e24ed7f5azppd_597.pdf">harassed</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/02/world/asia/gay-in-india-where-progress-has-come-only-with-risk.html">assaulted</a> and <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-45444652">jailed</a>.</p>
<p>Yet many gender researchers who study India – <a href="http://amybhatt.com/">myself</a> included – argue that India’s religious and cultural heritage has long been more accommodating to multiple gender and sexual expressions than Western societies. </p>
<p>According to scholars <a href="http://hs.umt.edu/ghr/faculty-staff/default.php?s=Vanita">Ruth Vanita</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saleem_Kidwai">Saleem Kidwai</a>’s groundbreaking 2000 <a href="https://www.palgrave.com/in/book/9780312221690#aboutAuthors">essay collection</a> on same-sex love in India, Hindus embraced a range of thinking on gender and sexuality as far back as the Vedic period, around 4000 B.C. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236037/original/file-20180912-133892-1palpbj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Hindu god Shiva has both male and female characteristics.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Ardhanarishvara%2C_Chola_period%2C_11th_century%2C_Government_Museum%2C_Chennai_%283%29.jpg/400px-Ardhanarishvara%2C_Chola_period%2C_11th_century%2C_Government_Museum%2C_Chennai_%283%29.jpg">Richard Mortel via Wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Hinduism’s first sacred texts tell stories of same-sex love and gender-morphing figures. The Hindu deity Shiva is sometimes worshipped as a multi-gendered figure composed of Shiva and his wife Parvati together, in what’s known as his <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ardhanarishvara">Ardhanarishvara</a> form. </p>
<p>Hindu texts from around 1500 B.C. likewise <a href="https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/LGBT_topics_and_Hinduism.html">show that the “third gender”</a> – individuals sometimes called “<a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-history-of-indias-third-gender-movement_us_58334db5e4b099512f841fd0">hijras</a>,” who do not fit into the categories of man or woman – were integrated into India’s political and social life.</p>
<p>In the Kama Sutra, India’s famed erotic guidebook, the character <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3704787?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">Svairini</a> is described as as a liberated woman who lives either alone or in union with another woman. </p>
<p>“Male-male attraction” is also “one of the themes of pre-colonial Urdu poetry” writes Vanita in her <a href="https://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9780230340640">book</a> about Indian Islamic literature from the 18th and 19th centuries.</p>
<p>India’s <a href="https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/240">Khajuraho temples</a>, built in Madhaya Pradesh state between 950 and 1050, even include depictions of homosexual orgies and fellatio, among other erotic <a href="http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20150921-indias-temples-of-sex">sculptures and scenes</a>.</p>
<p>Some scholars of Islam, India’s <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/06/29/5-facts-about-religion-in-india/">second-largest religion</a>, also find acceptance of gender fluidity in the <a href="https://dailytimes.com.pk/198615/third-genders-spirituality-social-status/">Koran</a>, which says that Allah “shapes you in the wombs as He pleases.”</p>
<p>Indeed, in <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/liaquat-ali-khan/transgender-dignity-in-is_b_10089712.html">India’s 16th-century Mughal courts</a>, hijras and eunuchs often held positions of high esteem as advisers or emissaries between men and women.</p>
<h2>The British preferred the binary</h2>
<p>India’s fluid gender and sexual norms did not fit into Britain’s <a href="http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/s/sex-and-sexuality-19th-century/">strict Victorian conceptions</a> of appropriate sexual behavior. </p>
<p>As the British empire grew more powerful in the Indian subcontinent in the early 19th century, so did their ideas about culture, society and law. Viewing local notions of sexuality as barbaric, British officials <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2008/12/17/alien-legacy/origins-sodomy-laws-british-colonialism">imposed</a> Western, Judeo-Christian sexual norms on colonial subjects.</p>
<p>Before the British, homosexuality was not illegal in India. </p>
<p>But by 1861 the British had consolidated their rule over India and were enforcing Section 377 of their penal code, which <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377">could punish those who committed sodomy</a> or other homosexual acts with life in prison. </p>
<p>When India gained its independence in 1947, this statute remained, becoming Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Colonial British rule over India included the imposition of laws mandating strict gender roles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.istaunch.com/">Istaunch.com/</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="iStaunch" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=479&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236041/original/file-20180912-133874-fvg1dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=601&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">British men and women observed strict gender roles in the 19th and early 20 centuries, and they required colonial subject in India to do the same.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.istaunch.com/">Author unknown</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Britain’s anti-gay colonial legacy</h2>
<p>India was not the only British colony where formerly acceptable sexual behaviors and identities became criminalized.</p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377">Section 377</a>, or a similar statute, was imposed in 42 former colonies, including Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Nepal, which was never formally colonized by Great Britain, also <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/10/14/how-nepals-constitution-got-queered">adopted</a> anti-sodomy laws based on India’s British-influenced penal code. </p>
<p>In 2007, the Nepali government became the first in South Asia to re-recognize a third gender category. Today, <a href="https://www.hrc.org/blog/in-a-historic-step-nepal-ratifies-new-constitution-that-includes-lgbt-prote">Nepal’s Constitution</a> specifically protects LGBTQ people from discrimination and abuse. </p>
<p>Neighboring Pakistan, like former British colonies Bhutan, Uganda and Singapore, still criminalizes homosexuality <a href="http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/legislation/1860/actXLVof1860.html">under Section 377</a>. This “unnatural offense” is punishable with up to 10 years in prison. </p>
<p>But in 2018, Pakistan, a Muslim-majority country, passed the historic <a href="http://www.senate.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1520932539_231.pdf">Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act</a>, allowing Pakistanis to choose their gender on government documents and prohibits discrimination in employment and public accommodations on the basis of gender identity. </p>
<h2>The future of gay rights in India</h2>
<p>Despite India’s legalization of gay sex, the path toward full acceptance of LGBTQ rights is complicated. </p>
<p>For more than a decade, India’s right-wing Hindu nationalists – who espouse a <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-are-the-origins-of-todays-hindu-nationalism-55092">fundamentalist interpretation of Hinduism</a> called Hindutva – have <a href="http://www.academicjournals.org/article/article1379514490_Hunt.pdf">worked</a> to portray homosexuality as a reprehensible Western import. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=428&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236091/original/file-20180912-133871-1jsjgpl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=538&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Members of the LGBT community dance to celebrate after the country’s top court struck down a colonial-era law that made homosexual acts punishable by up to 10 years in prison.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/APTOPIX-India-Gay-Rights/b195a4cda8b44f55beb44c135dce2d47/3/0">AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist elected in 2014, <a href="https://theconversation.com/indian-state-elections-give-modi-a-boost-but-the-country-is-fracturing-59632">is himself a follower of Hindutva</a>.</p>
<p>In July, as India’s Supreme Court was preparing to hear arguments on the gay sex ban, Subramanian Swamy, a high-ranking member of Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/being-gay-is-against-hindutva-it-needs-a-cure-bjp-mp-subramanian-swamy/articleshow/64927333.cms">retorted</a> that homosexuality “is not a normal thing.” </p>
<p>It’s “against Hindutva,” he said.</p>
<p>After the ruling against Section 377, an armed Hindu nationalist group called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh <a href="https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/rss-un-others-react-to-supreme-court-judgement-on-section-377/316138">declared</a> that “same-sex marriages and relations are not in consonance with nature.” </p>
<p>Traditionally,“ read the Sept. 8 public statement, "Indian society has not supported such relations.”</p>
<p>Historic evidence says otherwise. </p>
<p>“India’s pre-colonial sexual history is important,” Chaitanya Lakkimsetti, a Texas A&M professor who has studied the fight to end Section 377, told me. </p>
<p>Yet, she reflects, “This is not just about hearkening back in time.” </p>
<p>For Lakkimsetti, the legal victory shows that “the Indian constitution is a living document that protects minorities.” In legalizing gay sex, then, the Supreme Court is not just recognizing India’s rich past – it’s also “looking forward.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103052/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amy Bhatt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Before colonialism, India embraced homosexuality and gender fluidity. The Supreme Court’s repeal of a 157-year-old gay sex ban partially reclaims that history, but LGBTQ Indians still face hurdles.Amy Bhatt, Associate Professor of Gender and Women's Studies, University of Maryland, Baltimore CountyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1002812018-07-23T20:05:38Z2018-07-23T20:05:38ZSurvey: the Americans’ critical embrace of religion<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228456/original/file-20180719-142420-1jcm3mz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=45%2C45%2C4279%2C2820&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Americans are deeply religious people however our exclusive survey find that many do not want religion to mix with social or political life.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/thomashawk/6092348183/in/photolist-ahmSRV-bxb3f4-nmyZ1K-6cK2sR-ft3RwA-pisome-qvBcue-nhLyGN-nmxTrk-nCjwLV-ov8b4r-SdLeoA-YpyaYs-cQkXTW-9LxzaL-nfdftD-ow4Zms-pp5N1K-oSLA9f-fVV71p-RdvnB8-ZqbkLt-9moxrU-odFStN-dKFtiW-bEoMCV-a9MvFe-e4VrSf-mTUiRr-nqNEvR-fSJckv-a1VaDq-bgP3VX-bzt1t9-cTK9qJ-9nKe9h-3oVNqJ-pR2JJm-cTzeT9-fSQqau-fSnsrP-bBZq3s-23Qgs2r-jdnmFM-do8t71-cTz541-bBZnAw-fbhHKt-doWKRp-FVH39u">Thomas Hawk/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In a <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-religion-bad-for-democracy-97351">June 2018 article</a> on the complex relation between religions and democracy, Nancy Ammermann and Grace Davie make a plea for “paying attention to what religious people do and how they organize, not just to their ideas and theologies or even the pronouncements of religious authorities”.</p>
<p>In an April 2017 Internet survey of 1,041 individuals representative of the age and race composition of the adult population in the United States, we explored people’s link to religion and their views about the role of religion in society.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://theconversation.com/have-the-americans-lost-the-sense-of-democracy-98743">related survey</a> about attitudes regarding democracy, we found that more religious people do support more participatory approaches to democracy than average. The results below confirm the importance of religion for the American population, but also reveal that people are rather liberal in moral affairs and have mixed views about religious institutions. Political divisions are as salient as religiosity for many questions, confirming the polarization of US society.</p>
<h2>33% of interviewees say they pray several times a day</h2>
<p>According to the Pew Research Center study of the <a href="http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/">Religious Landscape</a> in the United States, those surveyed say that religion is an important part of their life.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=546&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=546&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228465/original/file-20180719-142423-1a6luwu.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=546&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Pew Research Center</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Our survey confirms that, by Western standards, the US population is very religious. Sixty-eight percent of the sample pray at least several times a week, 33% say that they pray several times a day, and only 14% never pray. Forty-six percent attend a religious service at least once a month (35% at least once a week). And 53% consider religion to be very important in their life. Two-thirds of the sample find it important to follow the customs handed down by their religion.</p>
<p>The young, the male respondents and the more educated pray less than average. The more educated and those with left-leaning political views find religion to be less important than the average of those surveyed.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=339&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228434/original/file-20180719-142435-uou19m.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=426&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For 57% of the respondents, their religion has been received through their upbringing. Only 25% of the respondents do not identify with the religious tradition they are the most familiar with. Interestingly, there is no systematic correlation between income, education, age, gender, or race, with this question.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=625&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=625&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228436/original/file-20180719-142428-8002nj.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=625&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Religious freedom</h2>
<p>The survey shows a great support for religious freedom, though with some bias toward one’s own religion (or lack of religion). Support for religious freedom is less strong among the young, male, middle-income, or low-education respondents.</p>
<p>The more religious people tend to support religious freedom for themselves as well as for others more strongly than less religious people. Interestingly, political orientation does not differentiate respondents about personal religious freedom, but conservatives are less strong supporters of religious freedom for others than liberals.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228438/original/file-20180719-142417-4tzocm.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=516&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Opinions about the role of religion in politics show a strong support, on average, for separation between state and religion. However, there is not a sharp opposition to the idea that religious leaders should have a political role, and there is moderate support for having schools provide education about religions.</p>
<p>Opinions about exempting religions from laws that go against their beliefs (for instance allowing polygamy or excision) are divided, the average opinion falling right in the middle, with a wide diversity of answers.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=305&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=305&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=305&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228439/original/file-20180719-142438-1h9iy1z.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Male and young respondents are less supportive than average for <a href="https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html">state-religion separation</a>, whereas stronger support comes from politically moderates and progressives, as well as non-religious respondents. Religious respondents are also less opposed to <a href="https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300203516/american-religion-american-politics">religious leaders playing a political role</a> and more in support of special exemptions.</p>
<p>School education about religions (religion being taught at school or neutral teaching about several religions) does not create systematic divisions in the sample, except that the most progressive respondents join the more religious respondents in supporting such education, while the respondents above 60 are less supportive of this idea. Interestingly, the older respondents appear generally more supportive than average of a sharp separation of religion from politics.</p>
<p>The respondents’ attachment to freedom of religion and state-religion separation is not completely opposed to some form of enforcement of respect for religions. The greatest support, however, is limited to punishing disrespectful behaviour in a religious place and is supported by less than 40% of the sample. One third of the respondents are opposed to any form of repression against the listed acts, with even greater proportions found among the middle-aged and elder respondents, the male, the moderately religious and the non-religious.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228441/original/file-20180719-142417-127ypvs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=590&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Social role of religions</h2>
<p>The respondents are overall very positive about the social role of religions, with respect to poverty, community life, and related actions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=231&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=231&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=231&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=290&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=290&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228442/original/file-20180719-142405-ugrq4j.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=290&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Interestingly, respondents also think that religions should play a role in preserving the environment. The rich, elderly or less religious respondents are less supportive than average of this idea, while the more liberal respondents are more supportive.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=165&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228443/original/file-20180719-142408-13gfjaq.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=207&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, their confidence in religious organizations is mixed. Fifty-one percent have great confidence in them, which is substantial but not overwhelming.</p>
<p>Strikingly, the minorities have lower than average confidence. The moderately and slightly religious join the non-religious in showing less-then-average confidence.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228447/original/file-20180719-142426-bt32wl.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Among the sources of caution by the respondents, conflictuality triggered by religions is one issue, although they also grant that religions can help resolving conflicts. Conflictuality is brought up more by male, progressive respondents, and non-religious respondents.</p>
<p>It is also striking that the idea that religion would be very different in an ideal society attracts substantial support. Such support is stronger than average among politically moderate and progressive respondents.</p>
<h2>Religions and morality</h2>
<p>The respondents’ attachment to religion does translate into a religious influence over morality and eschatology, but not so much on politics or sexual practice.</p>
<p>Answers to these questions do not vary much with socio-demographic characteristics, but do depend on political leaning and religiosity (the moderate or somewhat progressive respondents are less influenced, the more religious are more influenced).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=230&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228448/original/file-20180719-142414-1uamds0.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=289&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>People’s opinions about various practices which are or have been contentious for some religious traditions seem indeed rather liberal, with a large tolerance for homosexuality, divorce, abortion, and extramarital sex. Euthanasia trails behind, and interestingly, suicide faces a large rejection.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=469&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=589&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=589&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228450/original/file-20180719-142414-13ta5ej.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=589&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The survey shows that the more religious respondents are generally less tolerant than average, except for polygamy (for which only the moderately religious show stronger opposition than average).</p>
<p>In those surveyed, women are less tolerant than men about prostitution and polygamy, but more open to homosexuality. The high-income are more tolerant than average about divorce, extramarital sex, alcohol and euthanasia. The highly educated are more open to abortion and alcohol.</p>
<p>The older respondents are less tolerant about homosexuality, polygamy, extramarital sex and alcohol. The more politically progressive respondents are more tolerant than average on every item including polygamy.</p>
<h2>Women and LGBT</h2>
<p>When asked if “women should be allowed to serve as religious leaders,” on a scale from 0 to 100 the average support is 74, with stronger support than average by the less religious respondents, and lower support by the politically conservatives – but no gender difference. Should that be understood as a criticism of religions where males dominate? (On gender issues in religious organizations, see the analysis of the <a href="http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/political-economy/rethinking-society-21st-century-report-international-panel-social-progress-volume-3?format=PB">IPSP report</a>.)</p>
<p>The sample respondents seem rather positive about the current situation (68% think that women are well treated in the religious tradition they are most familiar with), but on the other hand, almost half of the sample think that they should be treated better. Moreover, 42% think that in the future women will be treated better (and only 7% that they will be treated less well), probably reflecting their perception of a societal trend to which religions will adapt.</p>
<p>The middle-aged, more educated or politically progressive respondents are more in favour of treating women better, whereas the rich are less so. Interestingly, religiosity does not correlate with responses about this issue, in contrast with the responses about female leadership.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=248&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228452/original/file-20180719-142417-thr5ki.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=311&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The sample was also asked about how their familiar religion treats LGBT people, and the answers are less positive than for women, both for the assessment of the current situation and for possible improvements. Almost half of the sample finds that this religion is not inclusive, 38% think it should be more inclusive, and 15% would like less inclusion.</p>
<p>However, when asked about the likely future, 44% of the respondents think that inclusiveness will increase, and only 12% that it will decrease.</p>
<p>Among the more supportive of improving inclusiveness for LGBT people, one finds the more educated respondents, as well as the slightly religious and non-religious, while the less supportive include middle-income or conservative respondents.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=221&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/228454/original/file-20180719-142414-1wye98r.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=277&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">IPSP</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p><em>Pariroo Rattan has helped with the analysis of the data. Nancy Ammermann and Grace Davie contributed to the design of the survey.</em></p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=244&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=306&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=306&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201397/original/file-20180109-36019-1jllshy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=306&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>This post belongs to a series of contributions coming from the <a href="https://www.ipsp.org/">International Panel on Social Progress</a>, a global academic initiative of more than 300 scholars from all social sciences and the humanities who have prepared a report on the perspectives for social progress in the 21st Century.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100281/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marc Fleurbaey co-directs the International Panel on Social Progress and has received funding for this survey from the Institute for Futures Studies. </span></em></p>The results of our survey reveal that people are rather liberal in moral affairs and have mixed views about religious institutions.Marc Fleurbaey, Professor in Economics and Humanistic Studies, Princeton UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/990622018-06-27T18:15:34Z2018-06-27T18:15:34ZCivil partnerships go mainstream as Supreme Court corrects a legal nonsense<p>The UK Supreme Court has ruled that civil partnerships should be available to heterosexual couples. The <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0060-judgment.pdf">unanimous judgment</a> marks the end of a long and hard-fought legal battle by Rebecca Steinfeld, Charles Keidan and their supporters, who argued that it was discriminatory to only allow same-sex couples to form civil partnerships.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court found that the government had discriminated against opposite-sex couples and breached the right to private and family life by offering different forms of recognition to opposite and same-sex couples. This corrects a bizarre legal anomaly that meant same-sex couples could choose between marriage or civil partnership, whereas for opposite-sex couples, marriage was the only form of legal recognition available. Soon – pending new legislation – heterosexual couples who don’t want to marry will very likely be able to form civil partnerships and secure legal recognition in key areas, not least inheritance, benefits, taxation and parental rights.</p>
<p>The ruling will also bring a new lease of life for civil partnerships themselves. Back in 2005, civil partnerships were introduced with much fanfare from government and great relief among many LGBTQ+ people, who, then unable to marry, could at last have their relationships recognised in law. But while civil partnerships were a welcome step forward, the legal rights they carried were so similar to marriage that it immediately became difficult to defend the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage itself – arguably offering a more meaningful social status than civil partnership.</p>
<p>In 2014, the coalition government admitted the game was up and <a href="https://theconversation.com/first-stats-show-no-stampede-down-the-aisle-for-same-sex-couples-30800">legislated for equal marriage in England and Wales</a>. Parallel legislation was also passed in <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-30486804">Scotland</a>, though not in Northern Ireland.</p>
<p>Since then, marriage has been the preferred option for most same-sex couples seeking legal recognition in England and Wales – but <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/marriagecohabitationandcivilpartnerships/bulletins/civilpartnershipsinenglandandwales/2016#links-to-related-statistics">a small number of new civil partnerships</a> are still being registered. There has been some head-scratching within government, then, about what to do with civil partnerships. </p>
<h2>Playing politics</h2>
<p>A <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/705768/Future-Operation-Civil-Partnership.pdf">government statement in May</a> sought to kick the issue into the long grass until at least 2020, concluding that research was needed before deciding the future of civil partnerships. But by correcting a legal nonsense that excluded opposite-sex couples from rights already enjoyed by same-sex couples, the Supreme Court ruling pushed the issue back into the spotlight.</p>
<p>The government should accept this ruling and legislate as soon as possible, and it could throw its weight behind a <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/civilpartnershipsmarriagesanddeathsregistrationetc.html">Private Member’s Bill</a> on this issue currently going through parliament. But the path to actually passing new legislation will be rocky.</p>
<p>The prospect of offering heterosexual couples a legal alternative to marriage is unlikely to sit easily with many Conservative MPs and their supporters, who might read this as undermining a key social and legal institution. This was the reason David Cameron <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-g-tatchell/civil-partnerships_b_5536994.html">opposed</a> granting civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples when he was prime minister.</p>
<p>Then there’s the awkward matter of parliamentary arithmetic. Since its disastrous performance in the election of June 2017, Theresa May’s government has relied on Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to retain a working majority in the House of Commons. Highly socially conservative by British standards, the DUP is unlikely to be enthusiastic about extending civil partnerships to straight couples.</p>
<p>Northern Ireland remains the only part of the UK and Ireland where same-sex couples cannot legally marry, and the Supreme Court’s judgment means it would surely be untenable for Northern Ireland to legislate for civil partnerships for straight couples without legalising same-sex marriage at the same time. To take any steps in this direction would therefore require a major shift in thinking for the DUP and its socially conservative base.</p>
<h2>Role reversal</h2>
<p>The Supreme Court ruling is a reminder that policy can bring about unintended consequences. Civil partnerships were introduced as a quick fix for a minority group. Although it was always clear this would lead to pressure for equal marriage, few imagined that LGBTQ+ couples would leapfrog their straight couples in being able to choose between marriage and civil partnership.</p>
<p>The idea that straight couples would one day be clamouring for civil partnerships as an alternative to marriage was not on the policy radar at all – and instead, for once, heterosexuals have been campaigning for rights already granted to LGBTQ+ people.</p>
<p>Of course, the government could respond to the judgment by abolishing civil partnerships altogether. That would be perverse, since it would force people already in civil partnerships to convert their partnerships to marriages. Instead, the government should bite the bullet and learn from experience elsewhere.</p>
<p>Close to home, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/21/isle-of-man-heterosexual-civil-partnership">Isle of Man</a> has legislated for civil partnerships for same and different-sex couples alike, and family life there has not yet descended into anarchy as a result. In other countries where straight couples have access to an alternative to marriage, such as the Netherlands, most choose marriage as the preferred form of legal and social recognition. So if civil partnership is the legal status that refuses to die, there’s still quite a bit of life left in marriage as well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99062/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Thomas receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. He is affiliated with the Labour Party.</span></em></p>Civil partnerships were introduced as a quick-fix device for a minority group. Instead, they ended up forcing heterosexuals to campaign for the same rights as LGBTQ+ people.Mike Thomas, Lecturer in Social Work, Brunel University LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/963872018-06-06T12:27:15Z2018-06-06T12:27:15ZRights for same-sex married couples to move around the EU confirmed in landmark ruling<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221974/original/file-20180606-137298-yvw0yy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/home">from www.shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In an historic <a href="http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=202542&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=392216">ruling</a> for the rights of same-sex couples, the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) has held that for the purposes of EU free movement law, the notion of a “spouse” includes the same-sex spouse of an EU citizen. </p>
<p>The case was referred to the ECJ from the Romanian Constitutional Court which was confronted with a dispute between a couple, Adrian Coman, a Romanian national, and Claibourn Hamilton, a US national, and the Romanian authorities. After living for a number of years in Belgium, where the couple married, Coman wished to return to Romania with his spouse. But Hamilton was refused the right to reside in Romania as Coman’s husband, on the grounds that Romania does not recognise same-sex marriage. </p>
<p>The case was referred to the ECJ as <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:158:0077:0123:en:PDF">EU law</a> requires member states to grant a right of residence to the “spouse” of an EU citizen who moves there in exercise of EU free movement rights. The ECJ was asked whether the term “spouse” should include same-sex spouses – and it ruled that it should. </p>
<p>As the ECJ underlined, EU member states still remain free to decide whether or not to allow marriage for persons of the same sex in their territory. But in situations where an EU citizen, who has been living in another EU member state, wants to return to their country of origin, their same-sex marriage must now be recognised under EU law. The same law applies for EU citizens moving to any other EU member state – so for example if Coman had wanted to move to Poland with his husband, he would be allowed to.</p>
<h2>Rights clarified</h2>
<p>The ruling provides much-needed clarity and legal certainty for same-sex couples who get married in an EU member state. It makes clear that wherever they wish to move in the EU, their union should be recognised as a marriage for the purposes of family reunion, irrespective of whether the host state allows same-sex couples to formalise their relationship in its territory. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1003911247451033600"}"></div></p>
<p>Currently, 15 out of the EU’s 28 member states do not permit same-sex marriage, including Romania, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. The court had comforting words for these countries, that its ruling “does not require” them to provide for “the institution of marriage between persons of the same sex”. But the ruling appears to have the potential of initiating a process of “voluntary harmonisation” whereby all member states will realise they need to recognise – and make provision – for same-sex spouses, even in situations when this is not required by EU law. The ruling offers an interpretation of “spouse” for the purposes solely of family reunification in cross-border situations. However, once a member state accepts that a same-sex married couple are “spouses” for the purposes of EU family reunification – and are therefore entitled to a right of residence in its territory – it would appear anomalous to strip them of this status for other legal purposes, regardless of whether those situations fall within the scope of EU law. This could include rights regarding taxation, inheritance, pensions, hospital visitation rights, childbearing and childrearing. </p>
<h2>Not open to ‘marriage tourism’</h2>
<p>At the same time, the court repeatedly stressed in its ruling, that an EU citizen can only claim family reunification rights upon moving countries if they have taken up genuine residence in the territory of another member state – and during that time have established and strengthened their family life. In previous <a href="http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=149082&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=388877">case law</a>, the court clarified that such genuine residence can only exist when the EU citizen has settled in another member state for more than three months. </p>
<p>This should put to rest fears that the ruling can lead to “marriage tourism”. It ensures that EU citizens living in a member state that does not permit same-sex marriage cannot move to another member state simply in order to marry and then return to the first state claiming the right to be recognised as a married couple. They will need to show that they have taken up genuine residence in that member state and during that period they established and strengthened their family life.</p>
<p>The court should be applauded for its audacious approach, in a case which involved an admittedly delicate matter.</p>
<p>The ruling, nonetheless, leaves a question unanswered. It emphasises that the obligation imposed on member states is to recognise same-sex marriages lawfully concluded in another EU country. The marriage of Coman and Hamilton satisfied this requirement because it took place in Belgium. Would they be in the same position if their marriage was concluded in, say, the US? This is a question that will have to wait for another ECJ ruling.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96387/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alina Tryfonidou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The European Court of Justice has ruled that EU member states must recognise same-sex marriages concluded elsewhere in the EU, even if they don’t allow same-sex marriage.Alina Tryfonidou, Associate Professor in EU Law, University of ReadingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/873572017-11-15T00:15:42Z2017-11-15T00:15:42ZHow to talk to your kids about today’s same-sex marriage postal survey result<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194690/original/file-20171114-30000-k67r8m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">It's important to speak to your kids about the same-sex marriage debate, but how much and what will depend on their age and level of interest.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After three months of sometimes acrimonious debate, the results of the same-sex marriage postal survey are in: 61.6% (a majority), voted yes to legalising same-sex marriage. <a href="https://marriagesurvey.abs.gov.au/news-alerts">Nearly 13 million</a> of us (a response rate of 79.5%) returned the survey form. </p>
<p>The postal survey exposed significant differences of opinion, and has left many feeling bruised. So much so that there has been an <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-18/same-sex-marriage-survey-lgbtqi-mental-health-support/8955956">increase in numbers accessing mental health services</a>.</p>
<p>Many parents might now be experiencing a dilemma as to whether they need to discuss this result with their children. Although the public vote has ended, the conversation will no doubt continue. Now more than ever, it is important to talk about the issues with your children and provide honest information. In the long term, it will be the youngest members of our society who will be most affected by the outcomes of this voting process.</p>
<p>Children will continue to receive messages from other sources. They may overhear adult conversations, other children may talk about it, and they are unlikely to have missed the topic in the media. While it’s important to be honest with your child, try not to be pessimistic or worry them about the consequences of the result or what happens next.</p>
<p>Here are some things that can help make these conversations easier.</p>
<h2>Language matters</h2>
<p>Start by having open communication and letting your child know that you are willing to answer their questions. <a href="https://www.psychology.org.au/Assets/Files/17APS-PI-ME-LGBTQI-C-IS-P1.pdf">Conversations</a> should be brief and factual, and the level of detail you provide will depend on your child’s age and level of interest in the topic.</p>
<p>Whichever side you’re on, try to use <a href="http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/toolkit_LGBTglossary.pdf">correct and respectful terminology</a> and be nonjudgmental of the opposing view. </p>
<p>Discourage your child from colloquial use of terms such as “gay” or “homo” to represent things that are negative or bad. Although often not purposely used to be hateful, these expressions can be quite commonplace in schools and carry negative connotations for LGBTQI+ people. </p>
<h2>Young children</h2>
<p>Don’t shy away from discussing the same-sex marriage postal vote with young children, especially if they have questions. Keep discussions simple and honest with younger children, and focus conversations around love and caring relationships. </p>
<p>To facilitate conversations, parents can introduce their child to more basic LGBTQI+ terminology such as gay and lesbian. Explain these terms simply. For example, “a lesbian is a woman who loves another woman”. In this way, the same-sex marriage vote can be explained fundamentally as deciding whether someone should be allowed to marry a person of the same sex. </p>
<p>Young children may have limited exposure to same-sex couples and “non-traditional” family structures, so it is important that parents help normalise all family types. Explain that some families have one mummy and one daddy, while other families might have two mummies or two daddies. Emphasise to children that regardless of how many mums and dads a family might have, what is important is that children are loved and cared for. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/194502/original/file-20171114-27612-4c5ftz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s important to talk to your kids about non-traditional family structures.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Older children</h2>
<p>Watching the news with your older child can provide an opportunity to discuss the issues and help you understand what your child already thinks and knows. During conversations, encourage children to try to understand both sides of the debate. Do not lecture them or try to convince them your viewpoint is correct. They will likely form their own views over time. </p>
<p>The language used and the topics discussed with older children are more complex and diverse. For example, you may explore different perceptions of gender and sexuality (like transgender and asexual identities), and discuss issues of discrimination, diversity and inclusion. What you discuss should be framed around what your young person is curious and concerned about - let them set the agenda. </p>
<p>Respectful and accurate use of LGBTQI+ terminology will be particularly important for older children as they are more likely to have been exposed to defamatory LGBTQI+ language in media and at school. If LGBTQI+ terminologies are not familiar to you, this may be a good opportunity to learn and discuss these together with your adolescent. A good place to start, for example, may be understanding what each of the letters in the LGBTQI+ acronym stand for. This <a href="http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/toolkit_LGBTglossary.pdf">glossary</a> of terms can be useful. </p>
<p>Adolescents likely have LGBTQI+ peers and may themselves <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/friends-and-family/a-parents-guide-to-their-childs-sexuality/">be trying to understand their sexuality</a>. </p>
<p>There are many benefits of having open, clear, factual discussions with children about relationships and sexuality from an early age. When parents talk to their children about sexuality-related issues, children are likely to feel good about themselves, their bodies and their gender. They can appreciate and accept individual differences, and understand what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Importantly, they can make informed and responsible sexual decisions later in life.</p>
<h2>Helping kids respond to homophobic bullying</h2>
<p>Parents who identify as LGBTQI+ may be facing stigma not only directed at themselves, but also at their children. Helping children to navigate stigma and respond effectively to bullying is important. </p>
<p>Parents may need to find ways to manage their own emotions when discussing the topic with their children. Although as a parent you will always want to put your child first, it is important during this time that you consider your own needs and look after yourself as well.</p>
<p>For school-age children and adolescents who identify as LGBTQI+ or whose families are LGBTQI+, the same-sex marriage postal vote can be <a href="https://au.reachout.com/articles/how-to-look-after-yourself-during-the-marriage-equality-debate">a vulnerable time</a>. </p>
<p>Schools can be <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-4556-2_18">challenging places</a> for LGBTQI+ young people, and more than half of LGBTQI+ students indicate they <a href="https://www.glsen.org/sites/default/files/2013%20National%20School%20Climate%20Survey%20Full%20Report_0.pdf">felt unsafe at school</a> due to their sexuality.</p>
<p>Parents should be aware that their child may be a target of homophobic bullying, especially as the same-sex marriage debate continues. Ask your child if they are OK and let them know you are always available should they need to talk. Be prepared to <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/friends-and-family/understanding-bullying-for-family-and-friends/">help your child respond effectively</a> to bullying and to be an advocate for them at school.</p>
<p>While there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-should-parents-do-if-their-child-is-bullied-at-school-37152">no one way to respond</a> to bullying, <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/young-people/understanding-bullying-for-young-people/">headspace</a> and the <a href="http://www.psychology.org.au/publications/tip_sheets/bullying#s9">Australian Psychological Society</a> both offer practical suggestions that parents can discuss with their children if they are being bullied: </p>
<ul>
<li>Remain calm and try not to react</li>
<li>Do not fight back </li>
<li>Stand up for yourself if possible (for example, “stop calling me names”)</li>
<li>Remove yourself from the bullying situation</li>
<li>Seek out friends and peers</li>
<li>Tell a teacher and parent what happened </li>
</ul>
<p>If parents are aware their child is being bullied, it is important that they do not ignore it. Schools will have anti-bullying policies in place and parents and schools should work together to protect children against bullying.</p>
<h2>It’s not over yet</h2>
<p>The debate is not over yet. Legislation will now be introduced in parliament, with Prime Minister Turnbull saying the government will pass legislation by Christmas. This issue will continue to be debated beyond today’s result, and these are not one-off conversations to have with your children. Your child’s needs and ability to understand the issues will change with time, so an ongoing personal conversation is important, especially as the public conversation will no doubt continue. </p>
<h2>Where to get help</h2>
<p>For information or support for both parents and young people, visit <a href="https://au.reachout.com/">ReachOut</a> or <a href="https://www.headspace.org.au/">headspace</a>. Crisis support is available from Kids helpline on 1800 55 1800 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87357/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Parenting and Family Support Centre is partly funded by royalties stemming from published resources of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program, which is developed and owned by The University of Queensland (UQ). Royalties are also distributed to the Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences at UQ and contributory authors of published Triple P resources. Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd is a private company licensed by Uniquest Pty Ltd on behalf of UQ, to publish and disseminate Triple P worldwide. Ms Kirby has no share or ownership of TPI. Ms Kirby receives no royalties or consultancy fees from TPI. Ms Kirby is a student at UQ.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>The Parenting and Family Support Centre is partly funded by royalties stemming from published resources of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program, which is developed and owned by The University of Queensland (UQ). Royalties are also distributed to the Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences at UQ and contributory authors of published Triple P resources. Triple P International (TPI) Pty Ltd is a private company licensed by Uniquest Pty Ltd on behalf of UQ, to publish and disseminate Triple P worldwide. Dr Morawska has no share or ownership of TPI. Dr Morawska receives royalties from TPI. Dr Morawska is an employee at UQ.
Dr Morawska has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and Family Planning Queensland. </span></em></p>Australia voted Yes to legalising same-sex marriage today, and it’s more important than ever to talk to your children about same-sex marriage and relationships.Grace Kirby, PhD Candidate in Psychology, The University of QueenslandAlina Morawska, Deputy Director (Research), Parenting and Family Support Centre, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/862052017-11-05T19:18:04Z2017-11-05T19:18:04ZGay rebels: why some older homosexual men don’t support same-sex marriage<blockquote>
<p>I … don’t for the life of me understand why the gay community has decided to emulate an institution that doesn’t work for even straight people … It is laughable</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is what a 59-year-old black gay activist in Los Angeles told me of his <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9780230244122">views on same-sex marriage</a>. He is typical of many older gay men who are bemused by the younger generation’s desire for marriage, reflecting the radically different experiences of those who grew up in far more restrictive and intolerant decades.</p>
<p>We know that generally <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-06/same-sex-marriage-result-calculator/8856294">older Australians</a> are less supportive of same-sex marriage. In 2013, I interviewed a small international sample of men as part of my research on sexuality and ageing. Most of the men over 50 were dubious, if not opposed, to gay marriage, while most of those under 30 were supportive. While these results may not apply directly to Australia in 2017, they are indicative of a generational divide between young and old gay men.</p>
<p>These older men have largely remained silent in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/same-sex-marriage-6397">current same-sex marriage debate</a>. I suspect this is because they do not want to be accused of betraying their own kind or exhibiting “internalised homophobia”, which for decades has been the accusation hurled at gay people who do not conform to the prescribed norms of the sub-culture.</p>
<p>It is vital that we listen to their perspectives, because older gay men are an already marginalised group, experiencing greater financial and social insecurity than younger men. We must ensure that same-sex marriage should it be legalised does not further sideline their experiences. </p>
<h2>Rebels with a cause</h2>
<p>One aspect of same-sex marriage that could confuse older gay men, and possibly also lesbians, is that it is at odds with beliefs they might have formed when they were young. In the early 1970s, feminists and gay liberationists asked their followers to think about how to liberate their own needs from the constraints of family, and experiment with alternative forms of intimate relationships, very different to the idea of nuclear family: heterosexual married parents with biological children. </p>
<p>In the early days, these relationships were as simple as two men regarding themselves as an item. The acknowledgement of friends, and sometimes siblings and parents, was enough public acceptance. Often these men would live separately but share a bed, kitchen and living room when it suited, a relationship that sociologists call “living apart together”. </p>
<p>By the late 1990s, these relationships had developed to include informal “families” that could include former boyfriends or girlfriends, supportive siblings and children from former heterosexual relationships. Children from surrogacy or informal insemination between gays and lesbians became more common in the early 2000s.</p>
<p><a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=C9OGcmFeNaEC&pg=PA151&lpg=PA151&dq=Single+Worlds+and+Homosexual+Lifestyles:+Patterns+of+Sexuality+and+Intimacy&source=bl&ots=nyVreTqwDR&sig=LVOG307nsnf010klwjDkHQMHgOw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwid_tfQzp7XAhXMGpQKHZs6AYcQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=Single%20Worlds%20and%20Homosexual%20Lifestyles%3A%20Patterns%20of%20Sexuality%20and%20Intimacy&f=false">North American sociologist Martha Fowlkes</a> called these gay rebels “marriage non-conformists”. Others argued that the push for <a href="http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/I/bo14770063.html">same-sex marriage</a> is having a “mainstreaming” effect on gays and lesbians, that is, that they are being turned into “pseudo straights”.</p>
<h2>The appeal of marriage</h2>
<p>Gay marriage would suit propertied gays and social conservatives who want the security of marriage for their relationships. It would also suit gay religious observers who want to make peace with their church and vicar or synagogue and Rabbi and be accepted by them. Maintaining gay relationships without church or state sanction takes courage and perseverance. </p>
<p>Marriage and children may appeal to young gay men because the alternative is to place their trust in community organisations and the social practices of the gay world. These are not always uniform or supportive. For example, I have argued that <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9780230573956">bars and clubs are the only safe space</a> for gay men to congregate and socialise in large numbers. Many of the young men I spoke to, however, complained of the impoverished relationships gay men formed there. </p>
<p>Parental approval can matter as much for young gays as it does for young straights and anecdotal evidence I heard while interviewing gay men of all ages suggested that for some young gay men marriage would ensure their parents’ approval. 22-year-old Zane (pseudonym) from Melbourne wanted to mimic his parents’ successful marriage of 30 years: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I want to have a really hetero life and … have children and … build a family and those kind of things with my partner and look forward to doing that … and I’d love to … grow old with someone. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>He justified his views as a more wholesome lifestyle than he had observed in clubs and bars where in his view drug taking and casual sex were commonplace.</p>
<p>Others spoke of benefits relating to property and estate planning. Garth (psuedonym) a 23-year-old university student from Melbourne, told me, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I can see like the benefits for like tax purposes and division of estate and stuff if someone dies so that makes it completely understandable as to why you would want to [get married]. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Other research shows that young gay men under 30 almost uniformly support gay marriage as a right or because, like their straight brothers and sisters, they want to mark and celebrate the success of their relationship achievement. </p>
<h2>Listening to older gay men</h2>
<p>It is not clear what effect same-sex marriage would have on gay people and the gay world. My suspicion is that its effect would be conservative. This could explain why it has the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4736569.htm">support of some religious figures</a> and conservative commentators. <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-makes-conservative-case-for-samesex-marriage-at-yes-launch-20170910-gyed86.html">Prime minister Malcolm Turnbull</a> said many people would vote for same-sex marriage because “they believe the right to marry is a conservative ideal as much as any other conservative principle”. </p>
<p>Should same-sex marriage be approved, the fear among radical queers is that it would become the gold standard for same-sex relationships and other relationship styles would be regarded as less worthy. </p>
<p>This is about more than marriage. My <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137435316">latest research</a> shows that gay men aged 60 and over had a strong propensity not to stop working after retirement and to have poorly planned superannuation. These men told me they used work to keep retirement boredom at bay. <a href="https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjWga-SjZ_XAhWEo5QKHSbvD5oQFggmMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.superannuation.asn.au%2FArticleDocuments%2F359%2FASFA_Super-account-balances_Dec2015.pdf.aspx&usg=AOvVaw39tz-K7_0arZmwSVb3oRA8">Poorly-planned super</a> is also a feature of Baby Boomers and of some men living with HIV. </p>
<p>I interviewed four older men living with HIV. Two had made careful plans for their old age while the other two had not, saying that because of their HIV they had not expected to live to old age. In contrast, many young gay men knew about and were interested in old-age planning.</p>
<p>Because gay social spaces and practices valorize youthfulness, they can serve to propagate ageist beliefs. Some young gay men I interviewed said that older gays were only permitted to share their social spaces if they were youthful. Some also said gay men of the Baby Boomer generation had brought HIV/AIDS on themselves. </p>
<p>Others however lamented the absence of non-sexualised social settings where different generations could socialise and exchange experiences. </p>
<p>If more young gay men embrace a “pseudo straight” identity through marriage and children, it is likely older men will continue to be marginalised along with their views and beliefs about relationships and family. It is refreshing to know, however, that some young gays have a real interest in speaking to and learning from older gays and their lived experience.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86205/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Robinson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When it comes to same-sex marriage, there’s a big gap in support between old and young gay men. Older gay men often see marriage as conservative, and fear marriage will create a “gold standard” for gay relationships.Peter Robinson, Senior lecturer in History and Sociology, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.