On June 26th, 2015, in a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the right to marry. Prior to the decision, same-sex marriage was only recognized by a handful of states; it is now federal law. In what was perhaps one of the most memorable judicial opinions on a constitutional issue in recent history, Justice Anthony Kennedy, one of the justices involved in the ruling and a long-time advocate for LGBT rights, wrote that "[i]t would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage...[t]heir plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves...[t]hey ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right."
While the ruling is clearly a milestone for the LGBT movement, it also has important implications for atheist civil rights. Traditionally, atheist rights have not been seen as a major political issue. In a 2014 Gallup poll, for instance, voters did not even list them as an issue to be considered during the congressional voting season. Yet the federal acknowledgment of a "non-religious" form of marriage might put atheist rights in the arena of national political issues.
One of the main issues that atheists take up is the recognition of religion in American life. Many atheists argue that certain rituals, including reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and the president-elect placing their hand on a bible during an inauguration, go against the First Amendment because such actions publicly endorse religion. In 2000, for instance, atheist Michael Newdow filed a suit against the Elk Grove Unified School District in Sacramento County, California because his daughter had to say "under God" when reciting the Pledge. He argued that his daughter having to utter those words and the words themselves were violations of the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment. Also, the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), a self-proclaimed free-thought organization with ties to atheism, reached out to Obama shortly before his second inauguration to urge him not to place his hand on the Bible during the ceremony. Perhaps alluding to John Quincy Adams, who placed his hand on a book of laws while being sworn into office, FFRF attorney Andrew L. Siedal asked the president " why not place your hand on the Constitution instead?"
It becomes no secret, then, why the legalization of same-sex marriage could be viewed as a triumph for atheists. For years, opponents of same-sex marriage have justified excluding same-sex couples from the institution on religious grounds. Many conservative political parties hold that Christian heterosexual marriage is the only legitimate form of marriage. " No government may legitimately authorize or define marriage...contrary to what God has instituted," the Constitution Party outlines in its platform. " We are opposed to any judicial ruling or amending the U.S. Constitution or any state constitution re-defining marriage with any definition other than the Biblical standard."
Republican legislators, on the other hand, have argued that nationally legalizing same-sex marriage would bring up issues of religious freedom. Senator Mike Lee, for instance, publicly stated that such a recognition of same-sex marriage by the Supreme Court would infringe upon religious individuals' and religious institutions' rights to define marriage: "I fear that..the government could start discriminating against religious individuals and religious institutions that have a religious belief about the definition of marriage."
This is why atheists object to a defense of traditional heterosexual marriage on the grounds of religious belief. They have argued that defining marriage strictly in religious terms gives legal sanction to religion while infringing on same-sex couples' civil liberties. "The Constitution requires our government to maintain a neutral position with regard to religious beliefs," said Jeff Dee, a host of the Atheist Experience. "The government has no obligation to criminalize same-sex marriage just because your religious beliefs say that it is not good."
The recent Supreme Court ruling is a victory for atheism not only because it makes marriage a civil rather than religious matter, but also because it debunks the notion that Christian heterosexual marriage should be the only form of marriage recognized under federal law. So what turned out to be a big step for LGBT rights could turn out to be a giant leap for atheism.
http://www.ksl.com/...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
http://www.gallup.com/...
http://www.oyez.org/...
http://ffrf.org/...
http://web.archive.org/... (on page seven of PDF file)
https://www.youtube.com/...
https://www.youtube.com/... (29:16-29:33)