Las Vegas Sun

October 31, 2014

Currently: 83° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

OTHER VOICES:

Will we tolerate tradition?

Another view?

View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:

Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.

Columnists - local and syndicated writers.

Letters to the editor - readers' views.

Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.

With the issue of same-sex marriage argued before the Supreme Court and raging elsewhere in America, a question:

Is it possible to be a traditional Christian or Muslim or Orthodox Jew — and hold to one’s faith on what constitutes marriage — and not be considered a bigot?

And is faith now a problem to be overcome, first marginalized by the state and then contained, so as not to get in the way of great changes to come?

The issue of same-sex unions is by nature contentious and divisive. It is not merely about equal protection under the law, but redefining the foundation of our culture, which is the family itself.

It’s not my intention to add to the anger and the noise. If you’ve followed the news of the crowds outside the Supreme Court this week, and watched those vicious little boxes within boxes on cable TV, with angry people barking at each other, you’ll get plenty of noise.

I’m not angry. Yet, I am struggling. And I’ve been silent on the subject for some time, trying to figure it out.

I’m not opposed to same-sex unions. Americans have the right to equal protection under the law, and same-sex couples should be able to expect the same tax benefits and other considerations allowed to those of us who are now being called, in some quarters, “opposite-sex couples.”

As far as I’m concerned, Americans have the right to do as they please as long as they don’t infringe upon the rights of others. America is all about liberty and freedom.

But this all comes now during the season of Lent, a time of fasting and prayer, when Christians are compelled to confront the obligations of their faith.

And while I hear the new moral arguments, about equal rights and equal protection, I’ve read little about the religious freedom aspects and what the Supreme Court’s ruling might mean for houses of traditional worship.

All I’m asking is that in the rush to establish new rights, that tolerance for religious freedom be considered, as well.

The federal government has already told religious institutions that run hospitals that they must provide contraceptives to their employees, even if it runs counter to their beliefs. So now, if the government ultimately compels us to describe same-sex unions as marriage, what’s next?

For centuries now, churches have allowed the state (and by this I mean the government) to license marriage ceremonies. It follows then that what is happening in America at present was inevitable long ago.

To speak of faith in this context is to invite the charge of bigotry — if not outright, at least by comparison to angry fire-and-brimstone preachers who seem to use the Bible as a lash. Some wield the Old Testament like a cudgel and avoid the New Testament, in which Christ asked us to refrain from judging and to love our neighbor.

No one with half a brain wants to be thought of as a bigot. But that’s what I and others risk as members of a distinct and irritating minority — as traditional Christians in journalism.

It is a world of language and political symbolism, a world where ideas are often framed so that they may lead to inexorable conclusions favored by the dominant culture. In this media world, I sometimes wonder whether the word “sin” has been outlawed by the high priests of journalism for fear of offending one group or another. And I’d rather not ask.

Now that the debate has been framed, if I hold to my faith and resist applauding the changes, I’m easily cast as some drooling white cartoon bigot of the Jim Crow era, denying black Americans the right to sit at a lunch counter and have a meal with the white folks.

It’s a cheap construction, yes, thoughtless, yet widely accepted in the news media and therefore effective.

What is also clear is that, given demographic shifts and attitudes, particularly by young people regarding sexuality and family, traditional Christianity is no longer the dominant culture.

It is the counterculture, fast becoming a minority view.

Again, I don’t oppose same-sex unions. I think Americans should have the right to associate as they please. My wife and I have had friends and family members who were gay, and died of AIDS. We loved them and still do.

But I am Greek Orthodox, a never-changing faith, and this is Lent.

In recent weeks, with the advent of a new Roman Catholic pope, there have been many beautiful words written about tolerance and change, written by those who on one hand support abortion rights and gay marriage, yet on the other talk lovingly of the comforting ancient rituals and the sound of ancient prayers.

Forgive me, but I find this all quite difficult to reconcile. The liturgy is not a costume drama. The incense isn’t a prop. The singing isn’t about nostalgia. These are means to reach a timeless place, where the state and its laws do not go.

And while I struggle with the fast-moving issue of the redefinition of marriage and its effect on our culture and how to reconcile the rights of others and my own religious beliefs, I ask only one thing:

Tolerance.

Remember that word? Tolerance?

Tolerance for those whose faith and traditional beliefs put them in what is fast becoming the minority.

John Kass is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 4 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. The U. S. Supreme Court will not make the same mistake with the Defense of Marriage Act [1996] that it made with Roe vs. Wade. The Court can't define marriage one way for all in the entire country. The States must be given that capability and right.

    Carmine D

  2. Reduced to its basics, marriage is an agreement between two consenting adults. In making that agreement no person other than my partner need have concern about it.

    Tolerance is indeed needed. If you believe we are all God's creations, must you not trust that all His creations are perfect and none are done with malevolent intent?

  3. This is one of the more ridiculous columns that I have encountered in quite some. A writer throwing up any number of straw men so that he can show us how anguished he is by all this.

    Your particular religious beliefs are not compromised, your church will not be required to marry gays/lesbians/TG folk under your imprimatur. Your hospitals and health care facilities are businesses, however, operating under public license in the public sphere, often run by holding companies whose only remaining tie to the religious founders lies in the name. Can't discriminate there, sorry about that.

    Are you a bigot...not based on what you write. Your religion and its direct institutions are closed clubs. Write whatever rules you want for its voluntary members. But don't think that you can apply your rules to those of us who do not wish to be part of your club. Our Constitution provides equal protection and rights to all citizens. If your church doesn't, well your loss.

  4. ...and if I am not "... a traditional Christian or Muslim or Orthodox Jew ..." and you want to force me to hold to YOUR belief on what constitutes marriage, you are most definitely a bigot.