Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties in the U.S.

This assignment analyzes the complex relationship between civil rights and civil liberties in the United States. It delves into legal definitions of both concepts, highlighting examples such as voting rights, freedom of religion, and equal protection under the law. The core focus is on the clash between these values within the context of LGBTQ+ rights and religious freedom, using court cases like Obergefell v. Hodges to illustrate this tension. The assignment concludes by examining how legal rulings have impacted societal views on equality and discrimination.

Surname: 1
Name:
Professor:
Title:
Date:
Conflict between civil rights and civil liberties
Civil rights are the legal actions taken by the government to create equality for everyone. In the
U.S the Fourteenth Amendment constitution assures that the law offers equal protection and
rights to its citizens. Citizenship. Anyone qualified as a citizen of the U.S has a right to vote and
that right is enforceable by the government. Other example of these rights are: education,
housing, access to public facilities, employment without any discrimination either of race,
disability, age or gender and equal admittance to health care and community services. Most civil
rights are formulated by the federal. (Karson 289)
Civil liberties states the protection of the activities of the government. For example, from the Bill
of Rights in the first Amendment, the citizens of U.S are free to exercise their religion of choice.
The government has no authority to interfere in what choice of religion or worship a citizen
chooses. Therefore the citizens of U.S have liberty from the actions of the government. Civil
liberties are conditioned through the years by legislatures and they include: the right to free
speech, voting rights, court trials that are fair, privacy rights, marriage rights, freedom from
unreasonable home searches and the right to remain silent in a police interrogation (Barry 245).
The two core values of the Americans are the religion freedom and discrimination freedom. Most
of the conservatives, freedom of religion equals to the right to resist same-sex marriage, gay
couples adopting children and other practices that go against their beliefs. This has been strongly

Surname: 2
opposed by the LGBT advocates and their supporters who believe that they should not face
discrimination due to their sexual orientation. The tussle between civil rights and civil liberties
pressures the legislation to either advocate LGBT rights or put boundaries to them in the name of
defending freedom of religion. ("Philosopher argues why no one has the right to refuse services
to lgbt people"34) This has been advanced in several states that do not support LGBT rights but
again there are some states that fully support LGBTs. This has resulted in court battles trying to
resolve this issue without favoring either the civil or liberal rights (Moghadam, et al. 221) An
example of a court case that involved charities owned by Catholics operate agencies that provide
adoption and foster care services to needy children. The sacrament of marriage under the catholic
doctrine, defines marriage as the unification of a woman and a man, and the catholic agencies
refused to give the orphan children to same sex couples. When chief justices reviewed marriages
rights, the LGBT community was granted a right to adopt children which was against the
catholic agencies beliefs, it led to the closure of their adoption agencies since the new ruling did
not favor their religion freedom. The LGBT people and their groups, believe that they should not
be denied children just because they are of the same sex, according to them it is discrimination
and a violation of their rights. (Pienaar 44)
When the rights of the LGBT community was recognized by the Supreme Court, it sparkled
mixed reactions among the Americans. The conservatives not being able to deny this right
shifted their strategy to limiting the enforcement of this law. The argument that gay people have
a right to marry as well as to practice their own religion has had so many views. ("The clash
between religious freedom and equality law 38") Liberties gives its citizens the freedom to act or
not to act. Liberty also allows interference as long as it is within the law, therefore in a way it
undermines the LGBT, considering the case of the baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay

Surname: 3
couple. The freedom exerted by liberty is good when viewed from a conservative perspective in
trying to limit the rights of the LGBTs, therefore some liberties are not protected by the law.
Liberty can either be negative, positive or republican. When it comes to cases involving liberty
and rights the government should always remain neutral between reasonable inconsistent
opposing concepts of the good, comprehensive moral doctrines, plans of life. Civil disobedience
can be used to express dissent but this should not grant equality objectors legal rights to say no to
issues of concerning some rights. A legal commitment to equality is meaningless if beliefs
provides a legitimate basis for exemption. This is because it’s beliefs that lead people to oppose
gay equality. Many Christians in the U.S take heed of the spiritual commands and want to act in
accordance to these commands, which is becoming impossible in this new era, no matter how
they disagree, in the face of the law they have to agree to such rights. (“The Citadel of Civil
Liberty 22")
The Obergefell v. Hodges case in 2015, occurred when a group of LGBTs came together to
challenge the law that had been pit challenge the marriage on the same-sex people, they wanted
the law to be accepted so that they can be recognized as other people same-sex couples sued their
relevant state agencies to challenge the constitutionality of those states’ ban on same sex
marriages that occurred in jurisdictions that provided for such marriages. The civil rights act was
also reviewed since it was supposed to provide equality for every citizen. The plaintiffs won the
cases as they were ruled in their favor. The states’ prohibition on same-sex marriage was
removed by the U.S courts of appeal and the states recognized marriages of all genders. The
fourteenth amendment guarantees equal rights in marriage and let the other states decide how to
handle the issue. The Fourteenth Amendment protects the liberty to marry, have children
whether through birth or adoption. The court ruled that everyone right to marry is an essential

Surname: 4
liberty because it is integral to the concept of individual autonomy, it helps two people come
together, get married, have children and build their home and it has long been recognized as the
foundation of social hierarchy. (Obergefell v. Hodges 68)
Conclusion
The Americans have been to have equity through marriage. This new law has proven that the
constitution values its people. The state has made the citizens of U.S recognize the effects of
discrimination based on chauvinism. Something that other chief justices had failed to recognize.
The court did not create any new right, it granted the people their hidden right to overcome
cruelty of being denied their basic rights of marrying their loved ones since they are of the same
gender.

Surname: 5
Works Cited
"The Citadel of Civil Liberty." The Taming of Free Speech, 2016.
Barry, John M. "civil liberty." Roger Williams and the Creation of the American Soul: Church,
State, and the Birth of Liberty, Viking, 2012.
Karson, Jill. Civil Rights. Greenhaven P, 2003.
Moghadam, Valentine M, et al. Making Globalization Work for Women: The Role of Social
Rights and Trade Union Leadership. State U of New York P, 2011.
"A philosopher argues why no one has the right to refuse services to lgbt people."
Theconservation.com - This Website is for Sale! - theconservation Resources and Information,
www.theconservation.com.
Pienaar, Gerrit. "The interaction between religious freedom, equality and human dignity."
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad, vol. 6,
no. 2, 2017, p. 120.
Obergefell v. Hodges." Oyez, 20 Sep. 2017, www.oyez.org/cases/2014/14-556.
"The clash between religious freedom and equality law." religion and politics,
www.religionandpolitics.org.