This week, The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed down two decisions that synergistically amount to a blank check to legalize discrimination and embolden divisiveness and hatred in the name of religion. In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis the court ruled in favor of a Christian woman who claimed her religious convictions would be violated if she had to develop a website for a gay couple. Of note, this case was based on a hypothetical gay couple. This scenario never played out in real life, yet the court decided to pre-emptively rule in favor of a woman who claimed her faith would be wounded to work on behalf of a gay couple. SCOTUS said, in essence, “It’s legal to hang a sign in your shop that says: ‘No gays allowed'”.
The second case, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard ruled that Affirmative Action programs violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. While on the surface, I can understand the argument that race alone should not be the deciding factor for admissions to an institution of higher learning, the truth is, it never was. Race was one among many factors that were used to make admissions decisions that nurtured a diverse and robust study body. And if we truly want to have equality in this nation, leveling the playing field for college admissions will have to include accounting for the legacy of racism in this nation that provides generational wealth, status, and access to powerful white people. Affirmative Action, while just a band-aid, was an attempt, a step in the right direction, to make up for the fact that non-white students often start a 100-yard dash on the 0-yard line but white students often start at the 25. Same dash, different starting points. It’s not hard to figure out who will win this dash nearly every time.
In combination, these two rulings further solidify the unhealthy paradigm of victimhood, of a zero-sum game mentality, that says “Who you are might hurt me, my feelings.” While it sounds so nice to use phrases like “color blind” and “race-neutral”, the history of these concepts is far more complicated and rooted in the “separate but equal” doctrine. These are all too often coded terms for maintaining the status quo of white supremacy. Together, these rulings send the message to Americans that while you can’t discriminate on the basis of religion, you can use your “religion” to discriminate. If being gay is against your religion, you don’t have to interact with gay people. If being an undocumented immigrant is against your religion, you are welcome to make them feel unwelcome. If gender equality is against your religion (see: complementarianism), you can decline to give equal standing to a woman in your business. And there is no test of religious beliefs. The court has been steadfast in that over the years: if you say it’s part of your religion, the court doesn’t make you prove it. While these examples may seem extreme, following the logic of the court, their legality would likely be supported.
What is exquisitely painful for me to see is discrimination and divisiveness in the name of Christianity. Nowhere do we have a model from Jesus Christ that he would do anything but welcome those who are outcasts in the church/culture of the day. He ate with tax collectors (read: cheaters) and prostitutes; he talked to foreigners and carved out time to elevate women; he doted on children and wasn’t afraid to touch the sick. The distortion of the Gospel that compels “Christians” to show disdain and to distance themselves from anyone unlike them, or “a sinner” in their eyes, is antithetical to the teachings and model of Christ himself.
What is deeply concerning to me is that SCOTUS wrote a blank check to give a nod to religious zealots in America to legally discriminate, which may assuage those little subconscious feelings of guilt that shunning those different than the tribe is fine because it’s legal. If we are to move beyond our racist past, we have to do more to truly make the playing field equal. Eliminating Affirmative Action erases years of attempts to offer the same access to American dreams that were never afforded to so many just a generation ago.
The challenge then, for me, if I claim to be a follower of Jesus, is to not cash that blank check. While it may be legal for me to turn the tables and say, “Being homophobic is against my religion. I won’t associate with you in my business,” that’s exactly what I have to refrain from doing. Jesus told us to walk the extra mile, to turn the other cheek. He told us to welcome and love. He told us to share our wealth with those who have been kept from it. Friends, you will know the true followers of Jesus by their love, not their pious discrimination.
Disclaimer: My viewpoints are not necessarily reflective of my employer, or any local, regional or national organization that I belong to. As a matter of fact, I pretty much just speak for myself. Please keep that in mind.
