SCOTUS

Popularity Contest: Gays vs. Evangelicals

Jesus-delivering-Pizza-46018742574Every once in a while as I’m flipping through my radio dial I stumble upon the Dennis Prager show. Today was one of those days. It was the “Happiness Hour”. Today Dennis theorized that, “You control how people see you.” If that’s true. I would like to know how evangelical Christians explain the latest poll that shows that gay people are seen in a more favorable light that evangelicals. An 11 point more favorable light to be exact.

Dennis of course was using this statement to say that you will be happier if others aren’t focused on what is different about you but rather on who you are. Just be yourself and don’t identify primarily as your minority group, disability, or some specific fact about yourself; i.e. a person who lost a child, widower etc.  What I don’t understand about that is if I am being myself how can I not identify as a woman? I am a woman. How can I not identify as someone who is short, or in their 40s, or a mom, or from Ohio? How is a black person not supposed to identify as black? And why would they want to? I just don’t get it.  Even if I don’t lead with these items, they are an inexorable part of who I am. The sum total of them is my identity.

But enough of that. Let’s get back to who is more popular gays or evangelicals? According to US News and World Report and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research:

In it, 53 percent of respondents held a favorable view of gay people, while 42 percent held a favorable view of evangelical Christians. Meanwhile, 18 percent of the likely voters surveyed held an unfavorable view of gay people, while 28 percent held a negative view of evangelical Christians. Interestingly, the popularity of evangelical Christians mirrors the favorables and unfavorables of gay people in 2011, when 40 percent of those polled felt positively about gays and lesbians and 25 percent held a negative view. There was no comparison polling released on how the electorate felt about evangelicals three years before.

The poll goes on to reveal that:

…on average, about one-third of identified Republicans, Republican primary voters, conservatives and Mitt Romney voters, favor gay marriage. Younger members of the Republican base are driving that trend. When evangelicals, for instance, were asked if they favored or opposed gay marriage, only 19 percent of those older than 50 favored same-sex unions, but 45 percent of the 18- to 29-year-old set did.

In my humble opinion, if Evangelicals really do control how others experience them, if they really can choose what others focus on about them, they might want to get busy with loving their neighbors as themselves and stop worrying so much about whether they have to bake a gay wedding cake or even a gay wedding pizza.

Aside

Birth Control, the Supremes and You.

birth control

SCOTUS has ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby. I have seen primarily two types of reactions. On the one hand are my friends who see this as good news, a sort of mandate that will open the door to challenging all sorts of parts of the ACA. On the other hand are my friends who are disappointed with the Court’s decision this morning.

To all my friends, no matter your take on today’s ruling, I offer the following thoughts:

  1. This is a very narrow decision applying only to closely held corporations. A closely held corporation is a corporation where less than 5 individuals hold more than half of the shares. They are private companies and are not publicly held.
  1. This decision leaves the door open for the government to pick up the slack and pay for contraceptives themselves using tax dollars, including the tax dollars of the owners of Hobby Lobby.  Congress could also choose to impose a small tax on large corporations to make up for the coverage. Alito also noted in the majority opinion that employees of these companies could still obtain birth control through an accommodation introduced by President Obama for employees of religiously affiliated nonprofits. This program allows for the insurance companies to provide the coverage while not involving the employer.
  1. Even though Hobby Lobby has won this battle, it may lead to them losing the broader war. Don’t get me wrong; I think it is only a small step in that direction. In other words, someday when we look back at this decision, we may see that it directly contributed to America eventually adopting a single payer system.

BONUS: I do find it interesting that the court was quick to point out that this decision only applies to the birth control mandate and does not apply to other treatments that raise life and death questions, such as vaccinations and blood transfusions. They also made it clear that the ruling was not a free pass for companies to opt out of any law they consider incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Where do I stand personally on the decision of the court today? I will leave you with the words of a woman far more eloquent and learned than I, The Honorable Ruth Bader Ginsberg who said in her blistering dissent,

“In the Court’s view, RFRA demands accommodation of a for-profit corporation’s religious beliefs no matter the impact that accommodation may have on third parties who do not share the corporation owners’ religious faith—in these cases, thousands of women employed by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga or dependents of persons those corporations employ. Persuaded that Congress enacted RFRA to serve a far less radical purpose, and mindful of the havoc the Court’s judgment can introduce, I dissent. “

 

Additional Reading:

http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eggh45efjj/top-20-largest-private-companies-in-america-2/

https://wordofawoman.com/2012/11/14/why-christian-companies-corporate-conscience-should-be-clear/

https://wordofawoman.com/2014/01/24/mike-huckabee-a-lesson-in-missing-the-point/