Shortly after President Obama “evolved” his position on “gay marriage” to one of support, he held a Hollywood fundraiser at which he described his new position as “a logical extension of what America is supposed to be.” As a liberal with a liberal vision of America, what this really means is that President Obama’s support for “gay marriage” is a logical extension of liberal thinking on the family and liberal views and definitions (not to be confused with realistic views and definitions) of “equality” and “tolerance.”
Shortly after President’s Obama’s announcement, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), a fellow liberal and a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, similarly announced a flip-flop in his position on “gay marriage,” from one aligned with his religious thinking to one in line with his political thinking. Majority Leader Reid, like President Obama, claimed to be following the leadership of his children and grandchildren on the issue.
Majority Leader Reid maintained his “personal belief is that marriage is between a man and a woman,” but he would no longer vote that way (in the past he voted in favor of putting the traditional definition of marriage into Nevada’s constitution). In his words, “it’s no business of mine if two men or two women want to get married.” Majority Leader Reid further highlighted the depth of his position switch by signaling that he would support a move in the Senate to repeal the traditional definition of marriage in federal law.
What does this mean for religious liberals? It means that, at some point, they will have to choose between their religious thinking and their political thinking, unless the trend in liberal political circles toward support for “gay marriage” changes – and there’s little sign that it’s going to change any time soon. In other words, they will have to choose either to keep their politics in line with what their religion teaches about God, or set aside those religious beliefs in public in order to accommodate their politics, like Majority Leader Reid did.
Whatever they choose, it is becoming increasingly clear that there is little room in the world of liberal thought for religious views of society – a grand irony in a worldview that claims to cherish “tolerance.” Religious liberals may soon have to become conservatives if they want to keep their political thinking consistent with the religious teachings they espouse.