(Written by Desiree Nordstrom.)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ce582/ce5829885cbc70ce107cb88b5c3fc7293a916c0e" alt=""
This event
was sponsored by the J. Reuben Clark Law Society (Orange County Chapter), along
with a number of co-sponsoring organizations, including Chapman Law School, the
Christian Legal Society (both Orange County and Los Angeles Chapters), the Federalist
Society (Orange County Lawyers Chapter), Jewish Federation & Family
Services of Orange County, the Orange County Jewish Bar Association, Pepperdine
University School of Law, the St. Thomas More Society of Orange County, Trinity
Law School, Western State College of Law and Whittier Law School.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ef77d/ef77d332f8fcc086a3c0299eee18a5706b577fca" alt=""
Prof.
Eastman and Prof. Rosenthal discussed numerous cases that have recently arisen
when the definition of marriage has collided with the free exercise of
religion. These cases have involved, for
example, a photographer who refused to photograph a same-sex wedding on
religious grounds, a florist and a baker who similarly refused to provide their
services for same-sex weddings, and a physician who refused to perform certain
in vitro fertilization services for a same-sex couple. The Professors not only debated about what is
the current state of the law on these subjects, but also about where they
believed the law was and should be heading.
Jeff
Shields, an Orange County attorney who served as the Moderator for the program said,
“The importance of addressing these topics cannot be overemphasized, as the
conflicts between same-sex rights and free exercise of religion rights will
surely only continue to grow and loom larger in the future.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2e3fd/2e3fdd753b11dd63765cb245371c927ebb706b25" alt=""
One of those
in attendance was Brent North, current Chair of the OC Chapter of the J. Reuben
Clark Law Society, who observed that “[i]n a world where finger pointing and
fear mongering pass for deliberation, it was good to see these important issues
discussed respectfully from both sides of the aisle. The right to define
marriage and the right to the free exercise of religion do not have to be
mutually exclusive rights. The panel did a great job of exploring the
borderlands where these rights meet.”
No comments:
Post a Comment