Two Oahu churches have resumed their federal court challenge to Hawaii civil union laws, even though state lawmakers this year passed legislation exempting churches under certain conditions from renting their facilities for civil union ceremonies.
The Lighthouse Outreach Center Assembly of God and Emmanuel Temple, the House of Praise, contend they should not be forced to allow same-sex civil union ceremonies on their premises.
They say the exemption is not broad enough.
The two Christian churches and the state had agreed to put the case on hold to give the state Legislature a chance to amend the law.
The Legislature passed, and Gov. Neil Abercrombie signed last month, an amendment that generally exempts churches that restrict marriage ceremonies to their members.
But churches that operate wedding businesses open to members of the public on their properties would not fall under the exemption.
Shawn Luiz, a lawyer for Emmanuel Temple and Lighthouse Outreach Center, which oppose same-sex civil unions, said his clients should be unconditionally exempt under the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
EXEMPTION HAS AN EXCEPTION
State lawmakers amended the civil unions law during this year’s legislative session to exempt religious organizations from renting their facilities for "solemnization of a civil union."
Under the amendment, the requests can be denied if the religious organization:
» Regularly uses the facility for its "religious purposes."
» "Restricts use of the religious facility to its members."
» "Does not operate the religious facility as a for-profit business."
A religious organization cannot be fined or penalized for refusing a request under the exemption.
But the exemption does not apply if the religious facility is a place of "public accommodation" that provides services or goods made available to the public
|
State lawyers, however, cited the exemption and filed a request to dismiss the lawsuit.
Deputy Attorney General John Molay said in the request that the two churches don’t have a legal basis to press their claims, but are using the lawsuit as a vehicle to overturn the law "because they have moral objections to civil unions."
U.S. District Judge Michael Seabright is scheduled to hear the dismissal request on Oct. 1.
THE CONTROVERSIAL civil union legislation was supported by gay rights advocates and opposed by church groups, including the Hawaii Catholic Conference and the Hawaii Family Forum.
Abercrombie signed the legislation into law in February 2011 that allows heterosexuals and same-sex couples to enter into civil unions, which have the same rights and responsibilities as traditional marriage. Hawaii became the seventh state to legalize civil unions.
The law exempted churches from performing civil unions but did not exempt them from renting their facilities for civil union ceremonies.
Four days before the law was to take effect on Jan. 1, Emmanuel Temple and the Lighthouse Outreach Center filed their federal lawsuit. The two churches argued that being required to rent their facilities for civil union ceremonies or face state civil penalties violated federal civil rights law and the First Amendment.
They described same-sex ceremonies as "an act of sacrilege" and civil unions as "fornication," which are against the churches’ teachings.
Seabright denied their request for a restraining order halting the state from implementing the law.
In his Dec. 30 decision, Seabright ruled that the churches’ concerns that they might be fined by the state under the new law was too speculative.
He said no one had asked the two churches to use their facilities for a civil union ceremony, and no complaint had been filed against the churches with the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission.
The judge also noted that the two churches did not even try to explain why a same-sex couple would want to have civil union services on premises owned by "an entity clearly hostile to same-sex couples."
William Hoshijo, executive director of the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, said last week that the commission still has not received any complaint claiming a church denied the use of its facility for a civil union ceremony because of the sexual orientation of the couple.
In his dismissal request, Molay said the current law "does create an exemption for churches to refuse to conduct civil unions so long as the church property is not operated as a for profit business and is not determined to be a place of public accommodation (as defined by Hawaii law)."
"There are numerous circumstances under which the plaintiffs could refuse to conduct civil unions and not be held liable for a civil rights violation, based on the exemption now in existence," he said.
Molay is also contending that the two churches do not have grounds to pursue the case. He said the lawsuit does not allege that anyone has asked that the churches rent their facilities for same-sex civil union ceremonies. He also said the suit does not allege the churches are under any investigation by the Civil Rights Commission.
There is "no threat of prosecution or injury on the forseeable horizon" for the two churches, Molay said.
Luiz said he will submit an opposition to the dismissal request and argue that the churches have legal standing to pursue the case.
In an unrelated federal case also involving same-sex couples, Senior U.S. District Judge Alan Kay is considering whether the state’s ban on same-sex marriages violates the U.S. Constitution’s due process and equal rights provision.
