Hello, Catholics? Jesus Called; He Wants A Restraining Order

From today's Washington Post:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.

....

The standoff appears to be among the harshest between a government and a faith-based group over the rights of same-sex couples. Advocates for same-sex couples said they could not immediately think of other places where a same-sex marriage law had set off a break with a major faith-based provider of social services.

How "Christian" can they get?

Council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) referred to the church as "somewhat childish" in the piece. She added that she hopes the Catholic Church will reconsider its stance. "Are they really going to harm people because they have a philosophical disagreement with us on one issue?" Cheh asked. "I hope, in the silver light of day, when this passes, because it will pass, they will not really act on this threat."

Read the entire article here.

Comments

[Tracy]

"...because they have a philosophical disagreement with us..."

No, because they think it's wrong.

You can make some valid arguments regarding same-sex issues when it comes to government. But criticizing the Church because of ITS views and not accepting yours? Come on...

[Kim]

Get off it. You know that this is wrong on every level. It's not about "not accepting" my views, it's about living in the past and treating people unfairly. And now, to make it's point, the Church is prepared to make other people suffer? Nice.

[Tracy]

"...it's about living in the past and treating people unfairly..."

In your opinion. And they're entitled to theirs.

If you don't like organized religion 'imposing' its beliefs on you, why would you try to do the same to them?

[Kim]

It's not about my "beliefs." It's about doing the right f'ing thing, treating real people with the same respect that I'd want from them. I'm not saying that gay people should have rights because I read it in a bible of some sort or on the wall of a cave. I'm not saying that some man sitting on a cloud told me that gay people are good. I'm saying do this because it's right, it's honest, and because history has taught me that discrimination is bad. It's that simple.

[Tracy]

They believe it's wrong Kim.

Jump up and down, logic, etc.

Government yes, Religion no.

*I sound like fucking Tonto.

[Kim]

Yes, I know that's what they believe. But I'm not talking to them, I'm talking to you. and you're supporting what they say and telling me that I can't criticize the Church. What's up with that?

[Tracy]

You can criticize them. That, unlike 'health care' actually is a right.

I happen (as you knew I would) to disagree with your criticism.

My thinking has changed a lot over the past several years, but I will not budge on this one.

This is an attempt to impose man's law and have it supercede what they believe to be God's Law.

*I have to go but will check back later/tomorrow.

Have a good evening. Or in your case, afternoon. In California no less. Lucky... (I'm seriously envious :)

[Kim]

You wrote: "This is an attempt to impose man's law and have it supercede what they believe to be God's Law."

I think you've got it backwards. But, so be it.

[Tracy]

This comes first, "... be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples..."

And this will be next:

"...required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings"

And although you might not believe that, I firmly do. And I think itt's a pretty clear and reasonable assumption.

You want a 'separation' between the two, then so be it. Keep your nose out of 'their' business.

[Kim]

So then what's next? They don't have to give benefits to blacks or Muslims or anyone who voted for Obama? C'mon!

[Tracy]

“… perhaps it's the liberal Democratic city council that may be too inflexible by failing to carve out sufficient exemption for religious entitities to stay true to their convictions while partnering with the city for social services for the poor."