Marriage Equality and Religion

An article in today’s USA Today explores the connection between legislative proposals for marriage equality and the relative proportion of people answering “None” for their religion on the recent American Religious Identification Survey. The results, of course, are no surprise:

Same-sex marriage proposals are sweeping into New England state legislatures this spring, particularly in places where organized religious opposition may be the weakest…states where the percentage of “nones”—people who say they have no religion—is at or above the national average of 15% are more likely to push expanding the scope of marriage, civil unions or same-sex partner rights.

For example, Vermont’s Senate just passed a same-sex marriage bill, which is expected to be passed by the House this week. And Vermont also has the highest percentage of the religiously unaffiliated in the nation at 34%. A similar situation is found in neighboring New Hampshire, where a marriage equality bill is expected to pass soon, and the unaffiliated are 29% of the population.

The analysis also found the reverse to be true: the states with the highest percentage of adherents to conservative religious sects were most likely to have taken legislative action against same-sex marriage. That, of course, is not news.

But what is particularly interesting in all of this is the generational aspect:

Barry Kosmin, Trinity College sociologist and co-director of the survey, says the correlation (between support for same-sex marriage and lack of religious affiliation) is no coincidence. “Given that 25% of GenX (those ages 29 to 42) and GenY (ages 18 to 28) are nones, this is where we are headed,” he says. “It’s a standoff between young people with a tremendous sympathy for civil rights and what appears to be biblical injunctions from religion.”

I think it’s very significant that the opponents of marriage equality have been generally unable to articulate a secular case for their position. For example, an essay on same-sex marriage by religious right leader James Dobson concludes like this:

Marriage is a sacrament designed by God that serves as a metaphor for the relationship between Christ and His church. Tampering with His plan for the family is immoral and wrong. To violate the Lord’s expressed will for humankind, especially in regard to behavior that He has prohibited, is to court disaster.

That message simply doesn’t resonate with the unaffiliated, for obvious reasons. Frankly, to a large portion of society it reads like gibberish.

Opponents of marriage equality have had more success when they can obfuscate the religious basis of their opposition with judicial or legal issues, such as with the recent successful passage of Proposition 8 in California. The proponents of the measure seemed to be successful in convincing enough people that the real issue was that the California State Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage rights was trampling on democratic rule. Nevertheless, the margin of victory for Prop 8 was narrow.

California missed the chance to lead the nation into a new era of greater marriage equality, but other states, all with relatively high percentages of unaffiliated, or “nones,” are moving forward:

Coming up: Legislatures in Rhode Island (nones 19%) and Maine (nones 25%) will hold hearings this spring on marriage “equality” bills. Nearby in New York (nones 14%), the Legislature could approve a bill “by the Fourth of July,” Rouse says.

This new push in the post Prop 8 era is very encouraging. With the diminished influence of conservative sects of Christianity all over the United States, I hope we’ll see this push for marriage equality continue and spread out of its current Northeast stronghold.

  • Rohit

    I think that skepticism about “gay marriage” should not be based on religious grounds, but on pragmatic grounds. Long term heterosexual relationships, traditionally called “marriage”, and long term gay relationships, are different institutions with some similarites but also some differences. To use the same word for them is a mistake just as it is a mistake to use the same word for cars and trucks. Cars and trucks both have wheels and are both entitled to use the roads, but certain regulations which apply to one do not apply to the other. Gay relationships deserve respect. But, in my view, this respect need not and should not take the form of confusing them with hetero relationships. What laws should govern gay relationships is a question which needs to be answered on pragmatic and humane grounds rather than on the simplistic answers, “There should not be gay relationships” or “they should be governed by the same laws as heterosexual relationships.” Both answers are simplistic and wrong.

  • BFBF

    “Long term heterosexual relationships, traditionally called

  • http://boredbeyondbelief.wordpress.com Joe G.

    Most of the same-sex couples I know want the same legal rights and responsibilities historically given to different-sex couples (via “marriage”). If I understand you correctly, there are differences between the same-sex and different-sex couples, but same-sex couples feel there are many rights and responsibilities unavailable to them now simply because they are same-sex couples.

    My opinion has changed. I now believe the state should not be issuing “marriage” licenses as I see this as a religious activity. The state should issue civil union licenses that identify a couple as having certain state sanctioned rights and responsibilities (typically to do with shared assets, legal agreements, and for the purposes of taxes, etc.).

    Get the state out of the business of religion so religion can get out of the business of dictating laws based on dogma.

  • William Bogie

    You are absolutely correct on this Joe. This is the best solution to the problem. If people want a marriage they can go to their church, synagouge or whatever.

  • http://squareprofit.com Hellen CLARK

    Hey, I justed wanted to give you a compliment on your blog, keep up the great work. I will be back to check it out in the near future.

  • BFBF

    “I now believe the state should not be issuing

  • Mark

    “Cars and trucks both have wheels and are both entitled to use the roads, but certain regulations which apply to one do not apply to the other.”

    Many of these regulations apply to public safety. How does that apply to marriage?

    “But, in my view, this respect need not and should not take the form of confusing them with hetero relationships.”

    What’s the confusion? Man/woman, man/man, woman/woman. I’m not sure that I see any impact on society based on the names on a marriage license.

  • Francis

    Why is the state involved at all in such a personal relationship as marriage?

    Until the Church of England gained power over all levels of social classes, religious marriage was the privilege of the upper classes. Ordinary people enjoyed marriage by other pathways. There was “handfasting,” and the “greenwood marriage.”

    As literacy became universal, and the Book of Common Prayer was established as the formally recognized guide to the official religion of the kingdom, the prayer book model of marriage was made the “only” one.

    The government and the church are inseparable in England, to this day, and it’s time to separate them.

    France has a good model. Marriage involves a civil ceremony at the mairie. Then those who want the church ceremony walk over to the church. The two procedures are not conflated.

  • William Bogie

    “France has a good model. Marriage involves a civil ceremony at the mairie. Then those who want the church ceremony walk over to the church. The two procedures are not conflated.”

    Right!!!! This is exactly how it should be. Tres bien La France!!!

  • http://Harmon Harmon E Chamberlin

    We have not heard from one gay person and until we hear from at least 10 our opinions are just that, opinions. Opinions, beliefs, faith, I think, are all in the same classification: wishing.

    Let’s get all the realities listed ( I haven’t seen one yet). Cars & trucks all have wheels and run on the same roads but they are not human beings and should not be considered. Our constitution provides that all citizens have freedom and equal rights under law, lets keep those two principles inviolate.

    Personally the French ruling sounds good and so does the one Joe G. proposed. It’s great to have the great comments already made

  • Francis

    “We have not heard from one gay person …”

    How do you know?

    And who cares? Why? Is it only victims who speak out about injustice?

  • Jerry

    Okay, here’s an opinion from a homosexual who’s been in a long-term relationship of 8 years. First of all, is there something that heterosexuals do as a married couple that homosexuals don’t do? Reproduction is out, but otherwise it’s all the same. When someone refers to all the depravity of gay marriage, I can only think of this. My partner and I got up, kissed each other good morning and did what most couples do. Housework, yardwork, going to work, paying the bills and such. Nothing that looks or acts any different then what is required to continue our survival. Nothing is happening that would make one think that we weren’t an average couple except that we are both men.

    What I find most unacceptable about the whole “gay marriage” debate is that gays/lesbians are forced to follow the majorities beliefs. As one who practices no religion, I’m forced to follow the beliefs of others by not being allowed a marriage or civil union. I personally don’t care what it’s called as long as we get all of the same rights as heterosexual couples get. If they are so worried about the sanctity of marriage, why not work on divorce first? 50 percent of marriages failing and they are worried about 10 percent wanting equal rights. Something is amiss here!

    Also, sure some cars and trucks have different bodies, but all require an engine to run. The commitment of any long term couple/married persons is the engine that keeps it going. There are days that both of us may have thought of throwing in the towel, but we keep working at it. It has been well worth it.