Freedom of religion

====As a legal form of discrimination====
Leaders of the [[Christian right]] in the United States, United Kingdom, and other nations frame their opposition to [[LGBT rights]] and [[reproductive freedom]] as a defence of religious liberty.<ref name="Fredman2020">{{cite journal|last=Fredman|first=Sandra|date=23 August 2020|title=Tolerating the Intolerant: Religious Freedom, Complicity, and the Right to Equality|journal=Oxford Journal of Law and Religion|volume=9|issue=2|pages=305–328|doi=10.1093/ojlr/rwaa017|doi-access=free}}</ref>

In court cases, religious adherents have argued that they need [[Religious exemption|exemptions]] from laws requiring equal treatment of LGBT people to avoid being complicit in "the sinful behaviour" of LGBT people.<ref name="Fredman2020"/> Moreover, other Christians argue that LGBT rights must be entirely removed from law to preserve the religious liberty of conservative Christians.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Whitehead|first1=Andrew L.|last2=Perry|first2=Samuel L.|date=2020 |title=Taking America back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States|location=New York|publisher=Oxford University Press|pages=134–149|isbn=978-0190057886|oclc=1150958230}}</ref> As pointed out at the [[United Nations Human Rights Council]] in the 2023 formal report of the [[LGBT rights at the United Nations|United Nations Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity]] on the basis of the explanation in a 2020 article by human rights expert [[Dag Øistein Endsjø]], adherents of denominations and belief systems who embrace LGBT-equality "can claim that anti-LGBT manifestations of religion (such as criminalization and discrimination) not only impinge upon the right of LGBT people to be free from violence and discrimination based on SOGI [sexual orientation and gender identity], but also violate the denominations' own rights of freedom of religion".<ref>[[United Nations Human Rights Council]] ''[https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/ahrc5337-report-independent-expert-protection-against-violence-and|A/HRC/53/37 Freedom of religion or belief, and freedom from violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity: Report of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity]'', 7 June 2023, § 162; [[Dag Øistein Endsjø]] “[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13642987.2020.1763961 The other way around? How freedom of religion may protect LGBT rights]”, ''The International Journal of Human Rights'' 24:10 (2020), pp. 1686-88.</ref> 

In 2015, [[Kim Davis]], a Kentucky county clerk, refused to abide by the Supreme Court decision in ''[[Obergefell v. Hodges]]'' legalising [[same-sex marriage in the United States]]. When she refused to issue marriage licences, she became embroiled in the ''[[Miller v. Davis]]'' lawsuit. Her actions caused attorney and author [[Roberta Kaplan]] to claim that "Kim Davis is the clearest example of someone who wants to use a religious liberty argument to discriminate."<ref name="Bromberger">{{cite news|last=Bromberger|first=Brian|date=15 October 2015|title=New book details Windsor Supreme Court victory|newspaper=[[Bay Area Reporter]]|url=http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=70989|access-date=16 October 2015}}</ref> Davis was briefly jailed and Kentucky court ordered her to pay the same-sex couple $100,000 in damages.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/14/kim-davis-damages-same-sex-marriage-license-kentucky | title=Kim Davis must pay $100,000 to US same-sex couple she denied marriage license | newspaper=The Guardian | date=14 September 2023 | last1=Oladipo | first1=Gloria }}</ref>