We think you're near Los Angeles

Currently in Los Angeles

Location: Los Angeles Current temperature: 63°F: Current condition: Clear See Extended Forecast

Same sex marriage supporters dispute new Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Bill

Freedom to Marry!
Freedom to Marry!
Photo credit: 
Katie Oudot

A new clash over a State Bill dealing with same sex marriage is emerging and two of the main opponents are San Francisco Democratic Senator Mark Leno and Bakersfield’s Republican Senator Roy Ashburn, two openly gay California legislators. Senate Bill 906, commonly called the Civil Marriage Religious Freedom Act was introduced back in January by Senator Leno with the support of Equality California, the state's largest gay rights advocate. The California Assembly passed the bill early August 46-25 followed by a 22-11 vote in favor of the bill by the State Senate.

The bill details, perhaps to some, a premature safe guard to religious institutions allowing them freedom to choose who they will and will not sanctify in marriage. The bill would protect clergy who decline to perform marriage ceremonies that conflict with their religious beliefs. In the language of bill, religious institutions would also be protected from losing their tax exempt status for any refusals.

In a state whose position on the legalization of same sex marriage hangs in the balance at the 9th Circuit court of Appeals, some may find SB 906 as a prediction of the outcome of the upcoming trial. If marriage of same sex couples becomes legal, California’s legislature has given religious institutions the power to practice their faith without the state imposing new restrictions when it comes to performing same sex weddings.

Senator Ashburn though views the new bill with less confidence. Senator Ashburn does not dispute a churches right for religious freedom but views the bill as a continuation of separating the definition of marriage creating a new class system one that diminishes in importance, a civil marriage as oppose to a religious marriage.

Ashburn further acknowledged that the bill is unnecessary since the practice of Freedom of Religion is already guaranteed by the US Constitution and the 1st Amendment. As a recently outed gay rights supporter Ashburn urged Governor Schwarzenegger to veto the bill as it now rest in the Governors hands for a final signature. In a letter to Governor Schwarzenegger, Ashburn wrote

“The major change under this bill would be the creation of a new class of marriages. SB 906 seeks to redefine the definition of marriage by inserting the word "civil" before the word "marriage" throughout state statue.”

Ashburn closed his compelling letter by adding:

“What I seek is full, equal marriage rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. SB 906 is clearly less than full marriage equality and therefore, I respectfully ask for your veto.”

The relevance of SB 906 will remain undecided till after the appeal trial which is scheduled to take place in December but one thing can be certain, if marriage for same sex couples becomes legal in California, religious freedoms will not be infringed upon creating one less validation for a ban by opponents of same sex marriages.
 

Advertisement

, Sacramento Civil Rights Examiner

Gina, a California resident, is a LGBTQ activist and writer who dedicates most of her time working towards equality and civil rights with various organizations. She has been a volunteer with Out4Immigration, a grassroots organization that is working towards immigration equality for bi-national...

Comments

  • FlexSF 1 year ago

    This is interesting. According to Ashburn, we don't need this bill because the law already insulates the anti-gay churches from executing a gay marriage. (The gays don't want anything to do with a bigot church anyway, so they'll be left in the dust where they belong.) If I were to go along with the information printed in this post, I think Ashburn has the better attitude; however, I may be misinformed.

  • Anonymous 1 year ago

    this bill is redundant. Of course government has nothing to do with the way a religious body is exercised however, there is also protection for equal rights of all citizens.

    Keep religion out of play and we can have equality for families

    http://ourscenetv.com/main/show/id/163

    Love is love, family is family!

  • Anonymous 1 year ago

    Without religion you have no basis for morality.

  • Anonymous 1 year ago

    Morality is for individuals to decide not the government. Law should not dictate morality. This is how the constitution is written. It has not changed in 200 years. The founding fathers wanted protection of all--morality was considered and still should be considered subjective. . .

Add a new comment

Join the conversation! Log in here or create a new account if you've never registered before.

Got something to say?

Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!

Don't miss...