Secularists Are Winning - Will We Be Better

We tend not to treat minority groups well.  In Jamaica, although Christians have always controlled nearly all institutions - political, educational, social - the minority Rastafarian population was made to suffer repeated humiliations and violations of their constitutional rights just so the majority could exercise their sense of superiority.  Rastas were expelled from schools, men were forcibly trimmed or shaved and discrimination in employment and accessing services was routine.
 In the US, although the majority white population were undeniably in charge, ritual humiliation of black people was required - “we only serve you people round the back of the store” - again and again in order to reinforce ideas that, for most, were perfectly compatible with their expressed Christianity.  Now, in places like Uganda, that human need to grind the boot in is being inflicted on a tiny minority of LGBT persons who could not, in any way, threaten the status or situation of the roughly 85% Christian majority.

Perhaps this is what accounts for the panic that is evident in the sudden, urgent calls for (further) freedom of religion protections in places like Belize, Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, and the US…  

Here is Shirley Richards of the Lawyer’s Christian Fellowship in Jamaica -

Thankfully, locally, both political parties have accepted the inclusion in the proposed Charter of Rights of robust religious freedom clauses. They have also accepted the submission to preserve existing laws relating to sexual offences, obscene publications and the life of the unborn. There is still a major concern, however, as the charter is undergirded by what prevails "in a free and democratic society". (…) While no malice is suspected, but because of what prevails in so-called 'free and democratic societies', where desires have become 'rights' it behooves us to be extremely careful in the wording of this document. If we are serious about retaining these existing laws, as we say we are, then it will be imperative for this clause to be rephrased.

(http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20091213/focus/focus5.html).  

Or consider this from a conservative and religious blogger in the US (Rod Dreher of The American Conservative) on what might be coming for those like him:

This is no small thing. There is scant appreciation for the importance of religious liberty among gay rights activists. If I were the principal of a religious high school, I would not fire gay faculty members because they were gay — but (…) the school should be protected from anti-discrimination law as a matter of religious liberty, because like it or not, homosexuality, within Christian moral teaching, has been seen for 2,000 years as morally wrong. That is fast-changing in the West, but millions of Christians still hold to the orthodox teaching. Are they all bigots who ought to be suppressed? Many gays and their supporters say yes. (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/andrew-sullivan-demonizing-dissent/).

And in a way, both have a point and express a fear that is not unfounded.  

Freedom of religion protections are essentially a fiction.  In liberal democracies, freedom of religion is actually only allowed to the extent that practice is not in conflict with the prevailing norms/rules of the secular state.  In Jamaica, Rastas are free to believe what they like, but the police can shut down any religious ceremony that involves ganja use.  Jews and Muslims are free to believe what they like in Denmark & Sweden, but ritual circumcision of their sons is outlawed.  In France, whatever your religious beliefs, leave your hijab, yarmulke or turban at home before heading off to school.  Now, it so happens that the prevailing norms/rules in Jamaica (and the rest of the Caribbean) reflect the traditional Christian position on same-sex relations and relationships.  But they will change, just as they have changed in most other countries in our hemisphere.  In the US, among young people 18-29, the vast majority of both Democrats (77%) and Republicans (61%) say they support legal marriage for same-sex couples (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/10/61-of-young-republicans-favor-same-sex-marriage/).    In 1973, when the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago first asked people about sexual relations between two adults of the same sex, 73% described them as “always wrong” and another seven percent as “almost always wrong.”   In the space of roughly 50 years, American public opinion will have almost completely flipped - and certainly for those who implement the policy and legislative framework of the secular state.

So, fellow Secularists, consider this exchange between a same-sex couple and a photographer in New Mexico:

-We are researching potential photographers for our commitment ceremony on September 15, 2007 in Taos, NM. This is a same-gender ceremony. If you are open to helping us celebrate our day we'd like to receive pricing information.

Thanks

-Hello Vanessa,

As a company, we photograph traditional weddings, engagements, seniors, and several other things such as political photographs and singer's portfolios.

Elaine

-Hi Elaine,

Thanks for your response below of September 21, 2006. I'm a bit confused, however, by the wording of your response. Are you saying that your company does not offer your photography services to same-sex couples?

Thanks,

Vanessa

-Hello Vanessa,

Sorry if our last response was a confusing one. Yes, you are correct in saying we do not photograph same-sex weddings, but again, thanks for checking out our site! Have a great day.

Elaine

Vanessa found this answer unacceptable, hateful and bigoted.  And the polling suggests that, eventually, so will most Americans.  Who wants to take a bet that we secularists - who are winning in the fight to advance secular principles in government - will do no better than the Christians we rightly criticized for their treatment of minority groups?  Anyone?  


Alison Irvine-Sobers
Guest blogger
Air Me Now panel member