G. Weldon Gaddy on “Freedom To Marry”

by Rev. Dr. G. Weldon Gaddy, Senior Minister of Northminster Baptist
Church, Monroe, LA (Alliance of Baptists) and President of The
Interfaith Alliance.

[Rev. Gaddy is a member of Clergy For Fairness, an organization of
clergy members and religious leaders who strongly oppose any attempt
to write discrimination into the United States Constitution.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Those of us who value religious pluralism must send a unified message
that freedom and equality go hand in hand with religious liberty.
Congress has no business legislating one religiously-based view of
marriage. In the interest of religious liberty, faith communities and
houses of worship must be allowed to wrestle with the issue of
marriage themselves.