By Marcus Stringer

There are many beliefs and behaviors that are not shared among the world's religions. Some religions don't believe in modern medicine or state-run education systems and standards while others do. Other groups differ on the role of women in the faith community and society, or whether there should even be a separation or differentiation between the faith community and society. Still more disagree on the correct day of worship, on the identity and characteristics of "God" or on which book is the true holy book.

For the past few decades, a number of societies have been free from religious-political authority in these matters. Generally, Sunday Blue Laws, laws governing Sunday sacredness and personal behavior on Sundays, are no longer used in America. Countless women in the western world benefit by not living in countries where fundamentalist religious law is the law of the land – such as in the Middle East, as well as parts of Asia and Eastern Europe.

Religious liberty and liberty of conscience in America are in particular danger. However only certain fundamentalist "Christian" groups seem to be interested in religious liberty. Their fixation on gays and lesbians is one example.

We gays are the most convenient targets thus far. Anti-gay religious fundamentalists vilify, harass and persecute us because we believe and behave differently than they do. When they attempt to establish their religious perspective as the rule of law and order for all people, their attempt is questioned and challenged where appropriate.

The fundamentalists complain that they are being persecuted right in America because compulsory prayer is no longer allowed in public schools. Persecution to them is when the public and the government question a judge's display of what is thought to be the "Ten Commandments" in the courtroom. When the symbol of one religion is selected, while others are not, there is at least an appearance of the "establishment of religion" in general and in particular, the establishment of one religion over other religions.

Fundamentalist Christians are quite concerned with religious liberty. Yet I propose that religious liberty is (or should be) of extreme importance to other Americans, especially gays, lesbians and other sexual minorities. We have yet to find our place at the table of religious liberty.

This is telling in what we do and don't say when asked, "Can homosexuals change?" The question is asked mostly from a religious perspective that believes homosexuality to be a sin, and illness or bad and heterosexuality as good. The "change" that is promoted is for an individual whose affectional, physical, sexual and spiritual attraction is strongest toward certain peoples of their own gender to become attracted only to persons of the opposite gender. If the actual orientation is not changed, the person is encouraged to stop acting on their attraction and desires to their own gender.

If I were asked the question "Can homosexuals change?" I would answer, that "Maybe, perhaps, probably, and possibly even 'yes', some people might be able to change their behavior". I don't know if the actual foundational attraction is ever completely changed. I can only speak for myself. If someone says to me, "I had a headache", how could I reply, "No you didn't" without absolute confidence in my knowledge of that person's experience? How can I say to that person that their head did not hurt? It is impossible unless I am that person.

So if someone tells me, "I once was Catholic but didn't want to be. Now I am Baptist, it's what I want to be", far be it for me to deny or even denigrate their claim! I have no problem with them choosing to be whatever they want to be.

However, those who promote "change" are not just telling about their own belief. They are not just trying to speak in place of the experience of others, but their goal seems to be to defame and destroy the personal experience of others.

When a person says, "My sexual orientation isn't a sickness, I don't want to change", they say, "Yes your orientation is a sickness and you must change". Sadly, many Americans would not be concerned at this scenario. Maybe I can make the point a little clearer.

Imagine that you are walking down the street. At some point you look up to see a billboard that reads something derogatory about you, and that your religion is Episcopal. Next they call your changeable religious beliefs and behaviors an illness, then they suggest that you should be expected to change from being Episcopal to becoming Mormon. Until this occurs, Mormons will place ads, hold political fundraisers and run television commercials defaming the Episcopalian faith. A bill is introduced to the legislature seeking to make it legal to discriminate against Episcopalians in jobs, housing and other rights enjoyed by the general public.

Perhaps more of you can understand what is happening now. To the situation between Mormons and Episcopalians you say, "No, this is wrong. This is religious harassment and persecution! Episcopalians should be able to believe and live differently as long as they aren't hurting anyone". If these are your thoughts you should be happy to know that you have chosen the side of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Religious belief, while very changeable, and even forsakable, is protected in these most important documents.

Of course there are alternate voices within faith communities. Some whole denominations welcome and accept sexual minorities into every aspect of church life. More and more congregations of different religious faiths are receiving more light through deeper study of their sacred texts and beliefs and are concluding that according to what they know now, homosexuality is as much a God-blessed part of creation as heterosexuality.

Religious liberty is for these welcoming, open and affirming congregations. Religious liberty is for the growing number of heterosexual individuals of faith who have a different view (from the traditional anti-gay view) of what the Bible says about homosexuality. And what about "unbelievers"? Are unbelievers protected against the harassing and persecutory behavior of "believers"?

How long will we allow the religious fundamentatlist to fill the seats in congress and make an establishment of their narrow religious perspective? When will our religious perspective as gays and lesbians, be protected from discrimination and harassment? In the next election, make sure that your candidate for office believes in and will protect your own religious liberty!