I kept looking for a conclusion in E. Gregory Wallace’s April 9 Point of View “North Carolina’s religious freedom bill hardly radical.”
If the North Carolina Religious Restoration Freedom Act is no different from existing federal law, what is its purpose? Why is it being proposed?
Wallace then revealed the true purpose of the N.C. RFRA – to allow, in some cases, the refusal of services for gay weddings.
He suggested that for “creative services,” religious beliefs should overrule the civil rights of gay people. He wrote, “Once you fine or shut down photographers and bakers, who’s next?” I think that Wallace is looking at this from the wrong direction. I would ask: “Once you allow religious prejudice to deny gay citizens their rights, who’s next?”
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The News & Observer
Wallace concluded that the N.C. RFRA will not be used to justify widespread discrimination against gays. So I guess he holds that limited discrimination is permissible.
America is moving toward extending basic civil rights, such as the right to marry, to everyone. This is a positive change that benefits all of us. Religious objections do not trump civil rights and do not justify denying public services to anyone.
Leader, Ethical Humanist Society of the Triangle