by Elexis Marie

Created on: January 20, 2009

Churches refuse to accept homosexuals and the government disapproves of this practice. Can they do anything about it? In all technicality, yes, they can. They are the government, the Big Man, Uncle Sam, after all. They can do just about anything they'd like until someone forces them to stop.

From a strictly Constitutional standpoint, though, no, the government cannot tax churches into accepting homosexuals are parishioners. Churches, aside from being private organizations, are strictly protected from the interference of government by the first amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Any law that "forces" an issue on churches is prohibiting the free exercise of the religion. The only exceptions of this to date are rituals which would violate existing laws (such as mass suicide). However, these laws do not exist to limit the free exercise of religion, but to limit the actions of an individual.

Using tax laws against a church to enforce a behavior - any behavior at all - is tantamount to telling them they may only freely practice their religion in a manner approved by the state, thereby negating the first amendment. Applying such rules to only specific religious groups (only Baptists, for example) would be unfairly singling out a group, and, most likely, would be in violation of equal protection rules.

However, it's important to note that using taxation to force acceptance of gays is not the same as using taxation as a means of keeping religion out of government - as was discussed in California in regards to the Mormon Church. While the latter is not ethical, it is not necessarily a direct violation of the first amendment.

When churches affiliate themselves with political actions - as the Mormons did with Proposition 8 - they run the risk of being involved in political reactions - such as the response from the homosexual community. Religious organizations must be allowed to freely practice their religion, but that does not necessitate unencumbered freedom from the pulpit. Religious groups must follow strict rules to remain eligible for their tax exempt status, and many of those rules include the extent to which they can involve themselves in politics.

A church which becomes too involved, by directly endorsing a candidate or using its social influence to sway voters, can be considered in violation of the separation clause and lose its status as a protected religious institution. This doesn't happen often, as most churches stay on the "safe" side of the political line, but it has been suggested by people far more educated on the topic than I am that such responses would be legally justified.

The central point is that government cannot and should not use legislative bully tactics to force a religious group into changing their precepts and "requirements" for membership. And citizens, despite the poor taste such discriminatory rules may leave in our mouths, should not support any action that undermines our basic freedoms.

Learn more about this author, Elexis Marie.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.