The United States is a pluralistic society. So is Alaska, and perhaps no place in Alaska is more pluralistic than Anchorage. Pluralism means that people of varying backgrounds, cultures and belief systems must somehow agree on ways to live productively despite disagreeing on how or why to live.

For such a system to work, there must be a civil society, a part of life that functions mostly independent of our individual beliefs, cultural practices, or religions. Broadly, civil society concerns itself with citizens' immediate safety, security, and economic activity. It's neutral ground. In the U.S., we are all free to make a living or create a household wherever we wish within boundaries prescribed by law. It should be evident that at home or within our own subcultures, we have much more latitude to live life as we wish. But civil society, the place where we all interact economically, stands separate and negotiates conflicts between constituent interests.

In April, Anchorage voters will be asked to decide whether or not people in the municipality will continue being allowed to discriminate against others in civil society solely because of transgender identity or sexual orientation -- no matter the latter's expression, gay, straight or both. It's not the first time such a question has been put to the community; but One Anchorage does represent the first time citizens will be asked to approve protecting their own rights in that regard.

Opposition to the One Anchorage antidiscrimination citizens initiative has exaggerated a division among religious groups that already existed. One of the largest churches opposing the ballot initiative is the Anchorage Baptist Temple, which has also been the subject of a municipal inquiry over tax exemptions.

Rev. Jerry Prevo, the head pastor and founder of ABT, has written a response to news of the inquiry and tied it to the upcoming One Anchorage vote. He reiterates his main opposition to the initiative: "If passed, these 'special rights' for homosexuals will take away the rights of religious groups, churches, organizations, businesses, religious people, and individuals."

It's a patently false opposition. One Anchorage won't do any of those things. The initiative, if passed, would only add the phrase "sexual orientation or transgender identity" to the following list of protected minority statuses already in municipal code: "race, color, sex, religion, national origin, marital status, age, or physical or mental disability."

The Anchorage Equal Rights Commission, tasked with enforcing and resolving complaints under the current antidiscrimination code, investigates discrimination against that list of people in matters of "employment, housing, public accommodations, practices of the municipality, educational institutions, Financial Institutions, and all entities doing business within the boundaries of the municipality."

Notice the key words, "doing business."

Churches occupy a strange place in economic life. They handle money, but they're not money-making enterprises. They influence civil society indirectly through their members, but they are exempted from some civil requirements.

The One Anchorage initiative makes no changes to any religious exemptions that churches already enjoy. Church owners and religious groups will still be able to legally discriminate against Anchorageites who identify as gay, transgender, straight, fat, skinny or anything else. In fact, the initiative adds a paragraph to municipal code that enshrines "legal protections consistent with federal and state constitutional freedoms and laws, including freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the free exercise of religion."

The initiative even adds the kicker, "Nothing in this Title shall be construed as permitting any unlawful act." That line, One Anchorage sponsors say, was included to assuage any of the pedophilic fear-mongering that opponents engaged in prior to the Anchorage Assembly's 2009 equal rights vote (later vetoed by Mayor Dan Sullivan).