Skip to main content

View Diary: We Must Fight The Church (101 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  RE: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    homogenius

    "However, the church is against homosexuality. That is their belief. I don't think it's government place to tell the church to violate its teaching (even though I disagree with the church's position on gays) to be forced to provide children to gay families."

    The government isn't trying to force the Church to do anything. It's saying that if the Church wants to run adoption agencies, they must abide by the law and avoid discriminating against homosexuals.

    "That is my take on the issue. If Catholic Charities is not receiving any government money, if they are totally private, then if they don't want to allow gays to adopt, that is their right. It is what their religion teaches."

    So in your opinion, if banks, restaurants, cinemas, bars, private museums, bowling alleys and so on all decided to stop serving black people, that would be OK because they are "totally private" and are not recieving government money?

    •  I see your point (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KnowVox

      But, to me, it is different from a public business that is secular. This is a religious organization. It has its own beliefs. I don't think it should be forced to violate its own teachings.

      Do you think the Catholic church should be forced to marry gay couples?

      http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

      by jiacinto on Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 11:39:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Erm...well, I suppose it could be argued.... (0+ / 0-)

        ...hat performing a Catholic marriage service is not a "public service", and so the rules wouldn't apply. That's a tricky one, I'll admit....

      •  So what if it's religious? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        homogenius

        "This is a religious organization. It has its own beliefs."

        Why should religion be given any special treatment? Religion is just a set of ideas, like any other, free to be criticised, argued against and rejected.

        •  Well (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elie

          I just have a problem with government forcing a religious sect to violate its beliefs. What is your take on the French law that passed a few years ago banning Islamic dress on women? Should Sikhs be required not to wear their headbands if government requires it?

          http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

          by jiacinto on Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 11:47:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think anyone should be forced to do... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dennisl

            or not do anything that isn't harming anyone else. So no, I disagree with a ban on veils and other religious attire that doesn't do any harm to anyone. But I don't disagree with it because its religious; I disagree with it because I oppose any restriction on human liberty that isn't absolutely necessary.

      •  That's stupid. (0+ / 0-)

        You are conflating its activities as a church and outside social work.

        If it offers jobs programs to help get homeless people functioning again (or any other social services), should they be allowed to only accept catholics? Can they refuse unmarried couples? LGBT people? Can they refuse to hire Jewish social workers?

        Those issues have all come up recently in religious social agencies here in the US.

        Blessed are the arrogant...for they shall be really impressed with themselves.

        by homogenius on Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 12:48:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think you missed an important distinction. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hestal, elie, heathlander

      Nobody is trying to tell the catholic church what to do in operating its churches. It's when it involves itself in activities that are inherently not part of its function as a church.

      The real question here is should Catholic Charities, an entity separate from the church, be allowed to discriminate on any basis where secular social service providers cannot? This is the issue in the US with the Salvation Army. It is a fundie church, but it also operates many social service programs. But it wants to receive public money and still discriminate in hiring and in who it provides services to based on religion and orientation.

      Taking away for a moment the issue of public funding, should Catholic Charities be allowed to discriminate in employment and placement based on religion? If so, why? If not, they they should not be able to discriminate based on orientation.

      Here in the US, Catholic Charities (in some dioceses) was more pragmatic, agreeing to offer domestic partner benefits, not discriminating in services and I think even placing some kids in gay homes. But then the church started clamping down and now Catholic Charities is going to get out of the adoption business in MA.

      I say give them a year or two to transition out of the adoption business. Let them continue to discriminate while other agencies take up the slack. Adoption is not a component of being a church.

      And remember, it is their bigotry that is potentially going to harm children that need adoption--not the law that prohibits discrimination. Let's be clear about where that responsibility belongs.

      Blessed are the arrogant...for they shall be really impressed with themselves.

      by homogenius on Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 12:43:48 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  i agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        homogenius, heathlander

        and i am a practicing catholic.  

        if the catholic church stops providing adoption services in the UK, other agencies, religious and otherwise, will eventually step in to take their place.  but they should not be allowed to provide adoptions in violation of british law.

        i do not believe the the government should make any exeption for the church.  It is the government's job to regulate adoption services.  either they comply with those regulations or they do not.

        if the church gives up its adoption services in the UK (and elsewhere), well then the church is going to have to live with themselves and take it up with god.  i think they will find that they are on the wrong side.

        but then again im not god....

        •  Thanks. In all fairness... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          elie

          I have heard many stories of compassionate, caring assistance and good work done by Catholic Charities, including employees who have tried to do so without discrimination or putting people down. But I have also heard about the dioceses increasingly imposing dogmatic restrictions. The same appears to be happening with the Salvation Army here in the US--the church side of SA is imposing doctrinal requirements on the social services side which is receiving federal funds!

          Blessed are the arrogant...for they shall be really impressed with themselves.

          by homogenius on Wed Jan 24, 2007 at 03:54:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site