Religion, Rights, and Relationships: The Dream of Relational Equality

Abstract

This essay provides an analysis of the terms by which the question of extending civil mamiage to same-sex couples has been posed, advanced, and resisted in Canada and the United States in the past few years. Denike draws on feminist theories of justice to evaluate the strategies and approaches of initiatives to reform the laws governing the state's recognition-and lack thereof+$ personal relationships of dependency and care. She also examines rhe political opposition to such reforms and the chulknges posedfor advancing human rights for gays and lesbians in the face of social and political prejudice against same-sex marriage.While philosophical postmodernity has long celebrated the death of God as a vestige of the modernist past, those of us who are working to advance rights for groups and individuals who are repudiated or despised by certain religions have had to come to terms with the fact that God has staged an unprecedented revival, and religions that invest in His word on sex and related matters have a tenacious hold on the politics of certain liberal constitutional democracies. This hold has invariably constrained the achievement of basic legal recognition of adult personal relationships between sexual minorities, such as gays and lesbians who wish to marry, and for that matter, any other relationship of care and interdependency that doesn't resemble the conjugal and procreative heterosexual model coddled within Western monotheism. The force of these constraints has been particularly evident in the political responses to the simple question of whether legal recognition should be granted to the civil marriages of same-sex couples. This question has occupied the public imagination of God-fearing folk in Canada and the United States, spurred on in part by the fear that it crosses the line drawn by the Vatican between what it calls the Hypatia vol. 22, no. 1 (Winter 2007) 0 by Margaret Denike

The Second Coming

“…The Charter also protects fundamental freedoms such as freedom of conscience, religion, thought, freedom of association, and the right to life liberty and security of the person. There is a universal and historical tension between freedom of religion and equality rights (Denike, 2007;Ellison, Musick, & Holden, 2011;Greven, 1991;Howland, 2005;Rose, 1999;Spong, 1991;Straus, 2001) which is evident in a number of Charter decisions emanating from the Supreme Court of Canada (A.C. v. Manitoba, 2009;Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren, 2009;B.(R.) v. Children's Aid Society, 1995;Ross v. School Board #15, 1996;Trinity Western, 2001;Vriend v. Alberta, 1998).…”

Religiosity Versus Homosexuality in America (& Elsewhere)

“…Since the government and the majority of its supporters apparently have a stake in the oppression of same-sex couples it is important that their motive and strategies be identified. Denike (2007) purports that religious doctrine is the primary strategy used to justify the presumption that marriage is for heterosexuals only, even though marriage statutes had nothing to say about the sex of the "two persons" until homosexuals began to turn to the courts to demand they include them. The first large push for inclusion began in early 1970.…”