Marcus Brown
[email protected]
Kim Davis was released from jail on Tuesday in what could be interpreted as a victory for the expression of religious freedom or backsliding back into the realm of legitimized discrimination. Davis, a court clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, was charged with contempt of the court and jailed for refusing to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples. Davis brazenly defied the recent Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage on the grounds that it went against her religious beliefs; by doing so, she has brought the issue of equality integration in the workforce to the forefront.
Even though a significant legal hurdle has been overcome, it has become quite apparent that a new hurdle is fast approaching. It won’t be enough to create laws that force people to treat others with respect and understanding. Unfortunately, there is no way to unify the population in one definition of what is right, just, or fair. The point is valid that forcing someone to defy her or his beliefs is wrong, even if it is in the name of advancing society as a whole to a level closer to true equality.
So how do we accommodate all members of society when portions of society have a staunch position against accommodating others? Do we force their hand in supporting what the majority defines as the greater good and hope we are on the right side of history in future textbooks?
Perhaps we should focus on something we all share by not sharing — who we direct our prayers to and how decide to attribute meaning and order to our lives. That freedom is vital to the foundation of this country and society, but with that comes a responsibility. Accommodation is a two-way street. If you are comfortable driving unobstructed while doing everything you can to obstruct others, you need to get off the road.
The individual right to express religion is inalienable, but it does not possess the ability to trump or negate the manner in which others wish to live their lives. True equality does not come with the forcing of beliefs in any direction but rather the understanding that at some level we all live our lives differently.
The debate Davis is igniting should not be about whether our role in society should be a reflection of our ideology but rather why any point of contention about religion, personal freedoms, etc., must become a zero-sum game. Is it not enough to have the freedom to disagree with something and continue on with your own life?
Freedom is not a finite resource that rapidly depletes the more it is allowed to be expressed. The price we pay for our place in society is minimal. We pay taxes, adhere to laws, aim to better society as whole, and allow the others the opportunity to do the same. Therefore, if people find themselves in a position in which their beliefs interfere with their responsibilities then perhaps they aren’t in the right position. As the rules of our society evolve and change, so do our responsibilities and mandates to accommodate them. A truly seamless existence for all will not come from imposing one’s beliefs on the world, but rather allowing the world to impose on one’s beliefs.
