An argument for same-sex marriage : religious freedom, sexual freedom, and public expressions of civic equality

The relationship between religious belief and sexuality as personal attributes exhibits some provocative comparisons. Despite the nonestablishment of religion in the United States and the constitutional guarantee of free exercise, Christianity functions as the religious and moral standard in America. Ethical views that do not fit within this consensus often go unrecognized as moral values. Similarly, in the realm of sexual orientation, heterosexuality is seen as the yardstick by which sexual practices are measured. The notion that "alternative" sexual practices like homosexuality could possess ethical significance is often overlooked or ignored.

In her new book, An Argument for Same-Sex Marriage , political scientist Emily Gill draws an extended comparison between religious belief and sexuality, both central components of one's personal identity. Using the religion clause of the First Amendment as a foundation, Gill contends that, just as US law and policy ensure that citizens may express religious beliefs as they see fit, it should also ensure that citizens may marry as they see fit. Civil marriage, according to Gill, is a public institution, and the exclusion of some couples from a state institution is a public expression of civic inequality.

An Argument for Same-Sex Marriage is a passionate and timely treatment of the various arguments for and against same-sex marriage and how those arguments reflect our collective sense of morality and civic equality. It will appeal to readers who have an interest in gay and lesbian studies, political theory, constitutional law, and the role of religion in the contemporary United States.

Author Notes

Emily R. Gill is Caterpillar Professor of Political Science at Bradley University. She is the author of Becoming Free: Autonomy and Diversity in the Liberal Polity and coeditor of Moral Argument, Religion, and Same-Sex Marriage: Advancing the Public Good.

Reviews 1

Choice Review

Making the theoretical and constitutional case for marriage equality, Gill (Bradley Univ.) analogizes sexuality to religious beliefs and practices, as both are a "central tenet of one's identity." She then applies former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's "endorsement" test from the 1986 establishment clause case Lynch v. Donnelly to make the case that state preference of "traditional" over same-sex marriage is akin to an establishment of religion by US state governments. Similarly, limiting same-sex couples' access to civil marriage is much like a denial of the free exercise rights of religious Americans in that such a denial is "a public expression of civic inequality." This smoothly written work does an extraordinary job of presenting a breadth of previous normative arguments for and against same-sex marriage and then placing its arguments in the context of existing literature on the subject. It remains to be seen whether the focus on the "endorsement" test remains appropriate considering O'Connor's departure from the Court and her replacement by Anthony Kennedy, who has championed a "coercion" test that leads to less respect for the rights of religious minorities. Nevertheless, the book marks an important, thoughtful contribution to perhaps the most vibrant debate in American constitutional law. Summing Up: Highly recommended. Upper-division undergraduate and above. J. Barth Hendrix College

Preface	p. ix
Chapter 1 Religion and Sexuality: Setting the Stage	p. 1
Chapter 2 The Impossibility of Neutrality	p. 32
Chapter 3 Same-Sex Marriage: Social Facts and Conflicting Views	p. 61
Chapter 4 Religious Establishment and the Endorsement Test	p. 107
Chapter 5 Free Exercise and the Right to Conscience	p. 145
Chapter 6 Establishment and Free Exercise: Who Should Be Outsiders?	p. 210
References	p. 241
Index	p. 257

Available:*

On Order

Summary

Summary

Author Notes

Reviews 1

Choice Review

Table of Contents