Disinformation? Outright lies? Scare tactics? What else would you expect from an organization claiming to represent the word of God? But the Archdiocese of Washington D.C., which is helping lead the losing fight to keep same-sex marriage out of the nation’s capital, isn’t above breaking the Eighth Commandment. You know, the one that says, “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” AKA: Don’t lie, peon!
As the City Council wraps up its hearings on gay marriage — interrupted by a marriage proposal — before moving to vote, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese submitted an unconvincing argument that the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009 will subject it to wild litigation fantasies, relays Catholic News Agency:
Representatives of the archdiocese spoke at an Oct. 26 hearing before the D.C. City Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary. They argued that the law would endanger Catholic services to the general public.
In written testimony, the archdiocese opposed the legislation and “any effort to redefine marriage as any other than that between a man and a woman.” The archdiocese voiced “deep concerns” that the bill would restrict religious freedom if it is passed as drafted.
To continue the archdiocese’s service to the poor of the District of Columbia, the archdiocese testified, a “meaningful” religious exemption is needed to ensure that the government “will not suppress its religious exercise in such a way.”
In its support, the archdiocese cited a legal analysis of the bill by the Williams & Connolly law firm, which said the expected effect of the bill would put the archdiocese in an “untenable” position under the First Amendment unless religious conscience protections are expanded.
“The District will effectively force the Archdiocese either to violate the law or to abandon forms of religious practice – care for the poor, hungry and homeless – that are fundamental to the practice of Catholic social teaching,” the law firm commented.
They worry:
In addition to overturning the definition of marriage, the legislation has no exemptions for churches, religious organizations such as the Knights of Columbus or religiously-owned nonprofits such as Catholic Charities if they provide services to the general public or rent space to individuals or groups outside of their faith.
According to the archdiocese, six prominent legal scholars including Prof. Robin Fretwell Wilson of Washington & Lee University have independently submitted a letter to City Council Chairman detailing serious religious freedom problems with the legislation.
“They note that religious organizations are at risk of lawsuits if, for example, they decline to offer their facilities to same sex couples or to limit married student housing to couples of the opposite sex,” the archdiocese said in a press release.
Other risks for religious organizations and individuals who cannot recognize same-sex “marriages” include the denial of access to government contracts and access to government facilities, such as leases. Licenses for objecting doctors and social workers could be revoked while child care licenses could be denied.
The proposed law could also allow lawsuits against those who do not provide same-sex benefits to employees and could result in the revocation of the accreditation of religious colleges.
Not to worry: We hear the Catholic Church has an excellent legal team.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
(Pictured: The Most Reverend Martin D. Holley, Bishop of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.)
Jerry Priori
Religion has never had to play fair. Of course they won’t have to abide by nondiscrimination laws that everyone else has to. I’d love to see that exception that the godbotherers have carved out for themselves ended, but that’s a fight for another day.
Cam
You’d think they’d be much more worried about the many many many still unsettled lawsuits against them for protecting and sheilding preists who moested and raped thousands of boys and girls.
Vo Dong Cung
Some time later, the Catholic Church will change US constitution to ban Colored American to be Presidental candidate.(Vatican said they will change the law in church friendly country- Reuter Sept 2008)
Stitch
This is like a Slave Owners Association arguing that they will suffer an untenable increase in their labor costs if slavery is outlawed, and touting the need for an exemption so they can stay in business.
SINCE WHEN DO WE ALLOW EXEMPTIONS TO EQUALITY?
B
You need better editing. The Catholic Church wasn’t exactly lying in this case – it was rather stating that non-religious organizations it owns or operates might be subject to the same laws as other businesses and be required to treat all employees equally. E.g., if the Catholic Church owned a hotel, it would not be able to deny health-care benefits to the spouse of a gay employee working at that hotel because, as a non-religious entity, the hotel would not be covered by any religious exemption.
It is not that they lied, but rather that they want to do something that is unconscionable. It is even unbiblical – “Give
unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” and hotels exist in the secular world.
Curiously, if the Catholic Church has good lawyers and listens to them, the church will not be sued – the lawyers will simply explain the law and tell them that they have to obey it. They would only risk being sued if they ignored competent legal advice.
Keith Kimmel
You know, I fully support the right of The Catholic Church to have its bigoted views. As long as they keep it IN THIER FUCKING CHURCH. Its when they start trying to apply it to my life (using the government as the enforcement arm) that I have a problem.
People really should study how Hitler came to power. There is a lesson there that the United States and her citizens have generally failed to grasp.
The real question here is: why is a NON-PROFIT organization allowed to own FOR-PROFIT business ventures in the first place.
B
Keith Kimmel wrote, “The real question here is: why is a NON-PROFIT organization allowed to own FOR-PROFIT business ventures in the first place.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)#501.28c.29.283.29 has some of the details. They can have “unrelated business income” but will be taxed on that income.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrelated_Business_Income_Tax describes what “unrelated business income” is.
If it all sounds confusing, just remember that Albert Einstein once called the U.S. tax code the most complicated thing in the universe (or said something very similar).
dontblamemeivotedforhillary
There is No God. There is, however, same-gender love since the dinosaurs. Keeping it in context about these Cultists!
B
Jerry Priori wrote, “Religion has never had to play fair. Of course they won’t have to abide by nondiscrimination laws that everyone else has to. I’d love to see that exception that the godbotherers have carved out for themselves ended, but that’s a fight for another day.”
Keep in mind that, when the First Amendment was written (keeping the state out of religion with an understanding that religion would keep out of the state), a rather bloody conflict, in part over religion, called The Thirty Years War was relatively recent history. That war devastated Europe. They didn’t want it repeated here.
Mark
It’s interesting they’re all bent out of shape about this and threatening this ‘n that when it comes to serving the poor / homeless, etc. in DC. What they fail to mention in any of this is they’re using taxpayer money. I think using ‘our’ money trumps their religious concerns. I am quite certain there are other groups in Washington who could provide the exact same services to these people without the religious dogma attached to it and frankly, do a helluva lot better job at it too! bugger off catholics