Gay Marriage. And then what?

This post from February 2011 may at first blush appear irrelevant since the Supreme Court dictated decided that the nation's definition of marriage needed to be redefined. But the fundamental question here was what would happen after same-sex marriage became the norm, a question probably more pertinent now than then. 

Today Elder Dallin H. Oaks, and Apostle of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints spoke at Chapman Law School here in So Cal. To those outside the church, this may not seem like a big deal, but to Mormons, the chance to hear an Apostle speak “outside” of the pulpit, especially on the subject of religious freedom is a rare treat.

Elder Oaks mentioned same-sex marriage in his talk today. But his address was really about the diminishing state of religious freedom in our country. Elder Oaks reminds me of what I see is the larger issue: the inevitable collision course between societal progressives of the left and religion.

In the late 90’s as liberals campaigned for domestic partnerships, I remember how much effort supporters of domestic partnerships went to assuage the concerns of opponents.  They argued that they were not pushing for “marriage,” just domestic partnerships. These laws gave registered same-sex domestic partners the identical rights of married heterosexuals.  But in the years that have followed domestic partnership laws, we see now that same-sex marriage is what progressives have been seeking all along.

Or is it? Proponents of gay marriage go to great lengths to stress what they really seek is equality. What exactly does that mean and where does it end? If same-sex marriage is finally enshrined in our country, does anyone really believe that the goal of equality will stop there?

It didn’t stop with domestic partnerships, and we are foolish to think those who champion homosexual marriage will be satisfied with marriage. If we give them same-sex marriage, then what? We are being naive if we think that the enshrinement of gay marriage will be the end of this issue.

Societal progressives downplay what they see as the alarmist tone of defenders of religious freedom. As the LA Times editorialized in the headline of today’s article covering Elder Oak’s talk “Many Americans find little evidence that religious liberty is threatened.” (Though if you read the article, “many” turned out to be “one”). 

The Times cannot deny that those who seek to change the very basic unit of society, for better or for worse, will not collide with society's religious institutions and that these conflicts will not continue even if same-sex marriage is made a reality. Frankly, these conflicts are already here.

Think the now infamous wedding photographer story was a fluke? Take a few minutes and peruse the website of the Alliance Defense Fund.  

When religious and progressive forces collide, it is clear that progressives have no problem with religious peoples, so long as they keep those religious mouths shut. Take a look at the comments section of the Times article and it becomes abundantly clear the left doesn’t just disagree with religious people. It wants to silence them.

So as we contemplate gay marriage, I hope we will also ask the more important question:  After gay marriage - what comes next?