The war of gay rights and marriage is the hottest button issue since the protests of Vietnam. The lines have been drawn between those seeking and promoting equal rights and the those faithful to the church and its teachings. This fight has caused the fight between religious liberty and the law. As well as, caused the threat of the stopping of charitable services.
Over the last month, the Diocese in our nation's capital, has come to odds with the proposed law of same sex marriage. (http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2009/11/dc-catholic-archdiocese-threatens-to.html) At a hearing, the CEO of Catholic Charities in Washington has stated, that if the law were passed, they would have to, either violate the law or their faith. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVj50a2dt4Y)
The voices involved in the D.C. Hearings (comments in relation to the video) show a harshness toward Catholic Charities for the threat of discontinuing services to the public. The responders even go as far as to say that the Bible says nothing about gay marriage. And in truth, gay marriage (in those terms) does not appear. But the Bible is very clear on homosexual relations. The act of same sex acts is condemned and carries the death penalty. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibh3.htm)
Recently, two Catholic governors have weighed in on the fights. VA Governor Kaine and MD Governor O' Malley (both Catholic) have slammed the diocese for their reaction to the proposed law.
The bill was proposed by D.C. Councilman Catania. The wording of the bill states that if a religious organization offers services (financial aid, homeless shelters, food, etc) to the general public, then they must not discriminate based upon sexual preference. The CEO of Catholic Charities has admitted that they receive about 75 percent of their funding from the public (state, federal, donations). The city council said, that since the charity was publicly funded, that they will be bound by the same law as a non religious charity.
The portion of the public that support the proposal believes that the Church is blackmailing the political process to further its agenda. They yell about the separation of church and state (not actually in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution). The Church counters with the right to practice their faith without government hindrance (the meaning of the First Amendment).
Many cities have already passed equal rights laws within their own communities. This causes a huge dilemma for religious institutions. The doing of the great command by Christ to help all in need in a system that doesn't allow them to do so within the confines of their faith.
Comments
Is this author a moron? "They yell about the separation of church and state (not actually in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution)."
Please refer to the US Constitution; Bill of Rights, Amendment 1: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." If the government chooses to enact a law that favors the Catholic Church's view of marriage (as only between a man and a woman), while denying the protection of the laws to those that believe otherwise, then they are in fact establishing religious ideals in our laws.
Instead of arguing about the separation of church and state, we should be discussing whether the constitution's promise of 'equal protection of the law' applies to everyone, or does it only apply to heterosexuals? Is it acceptable to deny American citizens the rights and responsibilities of the law simply because they are part of a minority?
"They yell about the separation of church and state (not actually in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution)."
And you'd like there to be no separation, wouldn't you?
Yes, he's a moron and a blatant bigot.
The church is a hired contractor, that like others placed bids to do this work. As with all contracts, rules must be followed, every contractor must meet the requirements. The church provides benefits for divorced and remarried couples so why the hypocrisy?
Stop playing the "church is a victim" crap, we are all the wiser to know that simply isn't true.
It seems the only thing the Catholic hierarchy care about is sex. Gay Marriage, celibacy, abortion, birth control, alter boys... It's all about sex for these Priest.
As a Catholic, I am very disappointed in the response of the hierarchy in putting sex issues and discrimination against a minority before the needs of the poor. We laity should send a message that these Bishops will understand. Do not make anymore donations to this organization, until it grows up and starts doing the good Jesus demanded.
While supposedly, same sex unions are punishable by death, so is adultry, kids talking back to their parents and being with a woman during her period...I smell hypocrisy here...Big time.
Secondly...I have 2 questions concerning church finances.
1 : Why did you spend all that money fighting gay rights instead of using it to feed the poor, help the homeless and such ?
2 : If you had enough money to be able to win those fights for equality then why do you even need public funding ?
Again I smell the stench of hypocrisy.
Finally...The first amendment which IS in the bill of rights IS the clause of seperation of church and state.
Quote: "The CEO of Catholic Charities has admitted that they receive about 75 percent of their funding from the public (state, federal, donations)."
OK, so it's the people, including gay people, that pay the taxes to support Catholic Charities. And, the Catholic churches pay no real estate taxes in addition to that! What a deal.
Nobody is forcing Catholic Charities to stay in Washington, DC. There are other charities that will gladly accept the government money AND provide their services with an eye to equality and civil rights FOR ALL. The city will survive without Catholic Charities. Say Goodbye, Catholic Charities, and don't let the door hit you on your way out; you will not be missed for long.
"The doing of the great command by Christ to help all in need in a system that doesn't allow them to do so within the confines of their faith."
Who is hiring the Examiner's writers these days? His bigotry aside, this so-called article would not meet the standards for a freshman composition class.
Get a grip! The ban in Leviticus is part of the Jewish purity laws, which also insist on on circumcision, and forbid eating shellfish, shaving your beard, or wearing clothing of mixed fibres. The Acts of the Apostles makes it clear that the purity laws apply specifically to ethnic Jews, and not necessarily to Christians.
Other texts in Scripture are open to serious question - see "Countering the Clobber texts, at "Queering the Church" (a wordpress blog)
.
And on the subject of "traditional" marriage, the Bible doesn't exactly support that either - the Hebrew patriarchs had multiple wives and concubines, in the New Testament Christ never married, chose his closest friends from a very unconventional household of three single people, and encouraged his disciples to leaves their families. See "The Gospels' Queer Values", also at Queering the Church.
If you want to apply every verse of Scripture literally, have you sold all your possessions and given all the proceeds to the poor?
The central example of Christ was one of abounding, unqualified love, of reaching out to the poor and marginalised, and of not passing judgement on others.
For the Catholic church, not Scripture, consider that they consecrated an openly gay bishop in the 11th century, that much earlier two separate bishops wrote celebrated homoerotic verse (which can be read today in the Penguin Book of Homosexual Verse), and that the pantheon of Catholic saints included many well-known gay men and lesbians. (See the Calendar of LGBT saints, in the Lesbian and gay Catholic handbook)
The public condemnation of homoerotic relationships by the modern Catholic power establishment is a mass of contradictions, in contravention of some of its own teachings on social justice, and completely ignores its own early history
I have many friends and family. Some of which are gay. I don't say i have gay, black or whatever friends or family. I judge people by their friendship qualities. I think gay people do have the right, to enter into a legal union recognized by the State and Country, the same as hetero sexual couples can. What i don't like is when they call it marriage. It can’t be and will never be. The word "marriage" is a religious term and means the union between one man and one woman under God in a religious ceremony, as stated in the Koran, Bible old and new testaments, as well as other religions documents from many of the words religions. The word “marriage” has meant this for thousands of years, way before governments and states started to hijack and control marriage, mostly for tax purposes. We need to have separation of Church and state on this subject. The state can't legally marry anyone unless they are endorsing a religious service, which by law they are prevented from doing. It is up to on
"I have many friends and family. Some of which are gay. I don't say i have gay, black or whatever friends or family. I judge people by their friendship qualities..."
Keep your church out of my state. I don't care what your "holy" book says, since most everyone seems to use it to justify their hatred of others. Marriage existed long before the bible was written and it will exist long after people have realized that religion is just a huge waste of time. Therefor I don't see where you can lay claim to a fiction of the state. Marriage isn't a religious institution, you aren't married by a church. You are married by someone that is sanctioned by the state to perform that task, and after you sign your marriage certificate, which is a legal document. Where do you get off inserting your religion in there? If you like theocracies, I hear Iran is nice this time of the year. Your hateful words would be much more welcome there.
As a catholic I have to agree with The Church, but I am outraged that they would even accept public monies (let alone have it make up 75% of their budget!) and then start making demands to the Piper that pays them. The Church has every right to discriminate, but it's ridiculous for them to take public money that most likely a portion of came from a group they wish to now discriminate against. Option 1: Take public money and dance to the govt.'s tune, Option 2: refuse public money and do what you want; there SHOULD be no "middle" option.
Did Jesus shun the lepers? No - he reached out to all those in need. This scam of an organization needs to wake up and see who's word they are really following. It sure as ____ is not their Lord's. CC is nothing more than an overpowered lobbyist front trying to push their own agenda - not Gods.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!