NEW YORK/OXFORD, OH —
The official investiture on Sunday of V. Gene Robinson as the
first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church (USA) flagged
a new stage in the debate over church, society and homosexuality
— an issue likely to become a factor in the 2004 presidential
election and that is already dividing U.S. religious communities.
The issue of gay bishops has deeply divided the world Anglican
communion of which the Episcopal Church is the U.S. constituent,
coming during a fierce debate on gay marriage in civil society.
Precipitating the debate are increasing efforts by locally elected
officials of cities tolerant to the homosexual community such
as San Francisco to endorse and perform gay marriage ceremonies
and, in reaction, President George W. Bush’s endorsement
of amending the U.S. constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage.
Senator John Kerry, Bush’s likely Democratic opponent
in the November 2004 presidential election, has said that while
he opposes gay marriage, he also opposes the amendment Bush supports,
saying it is unnecessary and potentially divisive.
Supporters of the president have said the recent moves by local
officials in California and in the states of Massachusetts, New
Mexico, New York and Oregon amount to “anarchy,” while
proponents of gay marriage say they are acting within the tradition
of U.S. reform and civil rights movements, many of which had religious
underpinnings.
Leaders of major U.S. Protestant and Anglican denominations
— the churches which have become embroiled during the past
decade over matters around homosexuality — have generally
not yet weighed in on the issue of gay marriage but that may be
about to change.
“Questions of sexuality are far from settled, and a constitutional
amendment which was perceived as settling this matter might make
it more difficult to engage in civil discourse around this topic,”
said Frank T. Griswold, the presiding bishop of the Episcopal
Church in a Feb. 25 statement.
However, Griswold — no stranger to debate within his denomination
over homosexuality — said that as he supports “the
honoring of differing perspectives within the Episcopal Church,
equally, it is my strong hope that our national discourse during
this political season will promote thoughtful and respectful conversation.”
Ben Voth, an associate professor of communication at Miami University
of Ohio who studies political rhetoric and issues related to the
separation of church and state, sees the debate as a complex one.
“I think there is an impulse to support marriage as understood
in a biblical tradition,” Voth told ENI. “But there
is a competing tradition of conservatism that basically expects
the government to be as limited in its actions as possible.”
Voth is an evangelical Christian, a member of Bush’s Republican
Party and a member of the non-denominational Oxford Bible Fellowship
who has observed first-hand the ambivalence among conservative
Christians regarding the proposed constitutional amendment banning
gay marriage.
Since Bush’s announcement last month calling for an amendment
to the U.S. constitution banning same-sex marriage, the response
from conservative Christian voters like Voth is seen to be of
great importance in Washington. While some political advisers
warned the president he would turn off some moderate or uncertain
voters, others argued that securing the conservative religious
vote is significant for Bush to help him to victory in November.
“It is interesting that the Defense of Marriage Act also
passed in the Congress with the margin of victory necessary to
secure a constitutional amendment,” Voth noted. “Nonetheless,
congressional leaders such as Dennis Hastert indicate doubt as
to whether they have enough votes. This suggests the constitutional
question is overriding the moral substance of the marriage debate.”
The arguments centre on civil rights for the advocates of gay
marriage, and tradition and family values for those supporting
the amendment.
“Marriage is arguably a religious creation. Islam, Judaism,
and Christianity and other religions of the world have held marriage
between men and women as a basic social rule for hundreds of years,”
Voth said. “I strongly question whether the state should
be able to re-define the religious term of marriage.”
Just how complex the matter of who supports what in the matter
of gay marriage is the fallout of a prominent Muslim group from
an interfaith group. After being accused of having links to religious
extremists, one of America’s largest Muslim organizations
has withdrawn from the Alliance for Marriage, an interfaith coalition
pushing for the constitutional amendment against gay marriage.
The Islamic Society of North America, an Indiana-based association
of 300 mosques and Muslim professional societies, withdrew from
the group last month to avoid further dissension.
The Alliance for Marriage is a bipartisan coalition of more
than 50 religious leaders, including Roman Catholics, Protestants,
Jews and Muslims — seeking a constitutional amendment banning
gay marriage but not to stop states from enacting civil unions
for same-sex couples.
Sayyid M. Syeed, the Islamic society’s general secretary,
said he was very happy with the president’s announcement.
“We believe that ultimately marriage is foundational in
all civilizations, and we believe it must be protected.”
Syeed was a founding member of the interfaith alliance, and
said, “Bringing together people of different religions gives
its mission strength, but it also makes us aware of hazards. Some
of the alliance members were scared of an Islamic group as part
of the coalition. Now we will work from the outside.” |
