SOCIAL: PROPOSED POLICY CHANGES/ RELIGION AND THE LGBTQ

SUBJECT:  RELIGION AND THE LGBTQ

PURPOSE:  This briefing note is a recommendation for changes in policy pertaining to the inclusion of the LGBTQ into religions.

ISSUE:  There is not enough regulation on inclusion for the LGBTQ in religions. 

Background:

Religions serve as a method whereby individuals can act in virtuous ways.  They are the very foundation of the legal system as it is such books of authority as the Bible, the Torah, the Zohar and the Qu’aran emerged from the Egyptian Book of the Dead used to portray and control the actions of its subscribers.  Such rules include “the Ten Commandments,” in Catholicism.  Islam makes it expressly evident that it prohibits anal sex through verses in the Quar’an.  The Bible says that “God created humans to engage in sex only within the arrangement of marriage between a male and a female” (2021).  The Torah says” K'maase Eretz Mitzrayim asher yeshavtem ba lo sa'asu - like the practice of the land of Egypt in which you dwelled do not do.”  According to Torah Web, the aforementioned verse prohibits the most immoral forms of behavior of which includes homosexual activity.  With these considerations, it becomes evident that homosexuality is frowned upon by these religions.  This results in social exclusion.  Social exclusion has many implications on the individual.  It creates many vulnerabilities such as they become prey for those that want to take advantage reducing the safety and security of the person.  This essentially makes them a "patsy."  In some instances, it results in actual physical harm.  In the Romanov’s case, it resulted in multiple deaths.  A tort can be defined as a harm done to another such that it causes injury.  What seems to have occurred here is that these religions are intentionally or deliberately excluding these people from their religion.  This has resulted in non-pecuniary losses such as pain and suffering experienced by those whomsoever have been excluded, the LGBTQ.  Is it not fact that it is religions cause to prevent crime and deviance through living a virtuous life by avoiding sins?  In Judaism, “chet,” means that something that goes astray.  Islam teaches that sin is an “act,” and not a “state of being” further they believe the God weighs in on the “good deeds” of individuals on “judgement day.”  Catholics on the other hand view sin as something that can be absolved through confession.  With these in mind, it becomes clear that the homosexual has drifted astray, and that individuals practicing religion can contribute to the integrity of the religion by doing a good deed through guiding such people in the right direction in which such “sin,” in this case homosexuality, may be absolved.  By taking these religions and with consideration of the legal framework, religion can create a more responsible and accountable theological belief.  It is clear that homosexuals are a part of any society, and it remains evident that these people are going to continue to fornicate as they desire.  However, its their exclusion in religion that raises concern on the safety and security of these people which is why religion must act to provide a means of support.  By not acting to include such individuals in religion, these authorities act in a careless way, which in law means negligence.  As it pertains to theological belief, they act against God because they do not love their countrymen. 

Considerations:

According to the UCLA School of Law, there are an estimated “3.5% of adults in the United States identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual”.  In Canada, in 2014, 1.7% consider themselves to be homosexual and 1.3% bisexual.  It becomes clear that homosexuality and bisexuality is a small fraction of the population however, that does not mean that they should be constantly refused by the religious authorities.  These people’s safety and security must be considered and the fact that religion refuses them creates a perpetual vulnerability and risk to the community.  Going forward, religion needs to adjust its practice to accommodate these people in ways that are respectful to their religious values.  Catholicism and Judaism says “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  Islam on the other hand says, “show kindness to parents, and to kindred, and orphans, and the needy”.  These homosexuals and bisexuals are neighbors   They also have safety and security needs.  By refusing them, the very basis of these religion is acted against.  Thus, for the integrity of these religions, it must be accepted that homosexuals and bisexuals have a method to be included in the religion.  This can be done via the creation of a new, “sacrament,” in Catholicism.  A sacrament is a sacrifice.  These homosexuals or bisexuals sacrifice their internal self interest in homosexual sex by accepting a new path.  Judaism on the other hand, has no “sacraments,” however they have rituals such as the “bar mitzvah,” a Jewish tradition.  By creating a new ritual to include homosexuals and bisexuals, the Jewish can act to guide these people as according to their faith.  Islam on the other hand has five pillars, “faith, prayer, alms, pilgrimage and fasting” these homosexuals and bisexuals can use the “shahada” to confess faith and thus be accepted into the religion.  These are just some examples by which these people can be included.  The stakeholders for this matter are the religions, the government and the citizen. 

 Options: 

Option 1:  Create a new tort of “exclusion”.

This is the least feasible however, it would help create a better society for the citizen.  By making changes to the British Common Law, it serves as a way to bring justice to the matter of exclusion.  Selecting this option would not only give homosexuals and bisexuals equity but it would allow other segments of the population access to their civil rights.  This is the most accountable option as it serves to benefit the citizen directly.  There would be high public acceptance for this option solely because they are given more support by the government.  This option concurs with the Canadian Constitution that people are equal and thus, as mentioned it benefits the citizen.  This option would also be inclusive, and it would bring a lot of insight and perspective to modern matters facing Canadian law. 

Option 2:  Mandate religious inclusion of the mentioned population.

This is not a feasible option because it would require a lot of cooperation by the religious authorities.  It would require review of the religious books of authority so that such inclusion proposed herein would fall in line with the belief system.  There is expected backlash that may occur as a result of this by their followers, however, it is the religions that are vicariously liable to manage such disagreements.  There is likely to be low public acceptability, however it is important to know that this is a matter of safety and security and it should be portrayed as such when dealing with the public.  This is an accountable option.  By mandating these religions to act on this matter, it benefits the cohesion of the community and reduces the potential harm that can occur to these people in question. 

Option 3:  Status quo.

This option is the most feasible however, it is the least responsible.  By selecting this option, the government remains accountable for the exclusion that is occurring within the confines of its borders.  Such risk creates a liability issue.  If not dealt with, the government can be in violation of the Canadian Constitution- specifically the clause pertaining to equality. 

Recommendation:

Option two is recommended.