In Kentucky Marriage Ruling, Judge Gets Religious Freedom Right

[cbayer]

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/7588/in_kentucky_marriage_ruling__judge_gets_religion_freedom_right/

Sarah Posner
February 12, 2014 3:38pm

Today a federal judge in Kentucky ruled that a state law prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriages performed out of state is unconstitutional.

Judge John G. Heyburn II, a George H.W. Bush appointee to the court, did not have before him the question of whether the state's ban on same-sex marriage is constitutional. But his narrower ruling, requiring the state to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, drew immediate condemnation from the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, who said in a statement that the judge was "elevating his own ideology over that of three-quarters of Kentucky voters who voted to preserve marriage in their constitution as it has always been defined."

As I reported last week, a legislative campaign is underway in many states in an attempt to preempt rulings like this. The Kansas House, for example, today passed a bill that would, under the guise of religious freedom, permit business owners to refuse to serve customers based on their sexual orientation or marital status, and even for state or local government employees to refuse to recognize the the validity of a legal, same-sex marriage. These legislative efforts are the new front in the marriage wars, and, if successful, would represent an unprecedented expansion of religious freedom.

In his opinion in Bourke v. Beshear, Judge Heyburn anticipated and rejected the idea that one person's religious belief should mean restrictions on the constitutional rights of others. "Many Kentuckians believe in 'traditional marriage,'" he wrote, and "many believe what their ministers and scriptures tell them: that a marriage is a sacrament instituted between God and a man and a woman for society’s benefit." Recognizing that they might be "confused" or "even angry" about a decision that questions their view, Heyburn set out to answer those concerns:

The beauty of our Constitution is that it accommodates our individual faith's definition of marriage while preventing the government from unlawfully treating us differently. This is hardly surprising since it was written by people who came to America to find both freedom of religion and freedom from it.

more at link

[struggle4progress]

1. Constitution, Article IV, Section I:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State ...

[pinto]

2. The judge did well anticipating the argument. Good, succinct statement -

"The beauty of our Constitution is that it accommodates our individual faith's definition of marriage while preventing the government from unlawfully treating us differently. This is hardly surprising since it was written by people who came to America to find both freedom of religion and freedom from it. "

[cbayer]

3. Agree - it was a good decision and I hope it won't be overturned.