Catholic institutions grapple with handling married gay workers

AP via Sarasota Herald ^ | 4/29/2004 22:46 | Ken Maguire

[narses]

BOSTON (AP) Catholic institutions face a quandary on the eve of the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts: The church opposes it, but the state's highest court ruled that couples are entitled to the rights and benefits of marriage.

Officials from some Catholic institutions say they haven't decided whether they'll grant spousal benefits to any gay and lesbian employees who get married.

It's a particular problem for the Boston Archdiocese, which was among the most vocal opponents of same-sex marriage when lawmakers debated a proposed constitutional amendment to ban the unions. The state's Supreme Judicial Court ruled that gay marriage is legal, effective May 17.

''We wouldn't recognize the marriage we obviously don't think we should have to cover it,'' the Rev. Christopher Coyne said. ''The question becomes how does that play out in terms of law.''

Coyne, the archdiocese's spokesman, said that because the archdiocese self-insures some of its benefits, it may not have to answer to state laws governing benefits.

Labor and employment lawyer Sharen Litwin said employer self-insured plans, as opposed to offering HMOs, are regulated by the federal government, which recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman.

''If the archdiocese is self-funded for insurance, I don't think it would have to provide benefits,'' said Litwin, a partner at the Boston firm of Kotin Crabtree and Strong.

The archdiocese runs 168 schools and a health care network that includes St. Elizabeth's Medical Center in Boston. Archbishop Sean O'Malley declined to comment Thursday.

Boston College, one of the oldest Catholic universities in the nation, also has yet to make a decision on how to handle the issue.

''We're in the process of reviewing that question right now,'' BC spokesman Jack Dunn said. ''The SJC ruling has implied that there will not be exceptions granted to religious institutions, but there is still some ambiguity surrounding that issue.''

Dunn added: ''The consensus is people will comply with the law.''

And it's not just religious institutions. Boston University, which like BC does not provide domestic partner benefits, said it also hasn't decided what to do.

''What to do with the change in the law is under review,'' BU spokesman Kevin Carleton said. ''It's not a situation that is treated the same under federal law.''

But barring a few exceptions, Litwin does not expect employers to be able to ignore the law.

''They still have to adhere to the anti-discrimination laws,'' she said.

Coyne said that church lawyers are planning just in case to make changes to the archdiocesan medical and pension plans.

''That doesn't mean that there's been any decision made one way or the other,'' Coyne said. ''We will have an answer to that after the 17th. I don't have an answer right now.''

Coyne said he has ''no idea'' how many employees might seek those benefits.

''Obviously it will happen,'' he said.

Gay marriage advocates urged employers to comply with the SJC ruling.

''There doesn't have to be any conflict here whatsoever,'' said gay rights attorney Mary Bonauto, who represented seven same-sex couples in their landmark quest for marriage licenses.

Spokespeople at Catholic colleges Merrimack, Regis, and Holy Cross did not return calls to comment.

[narses]

Church/State Ping.

[thoughtomator]

I don't suppose simply keeping homosexuals out of jobs where their very homosexuality is a conflict of interest is an option?

[narses]

Don't be silly.

[steplock]

They should do what the NY church did - tell them "Fine" and proceed to shut down ALL of their paid positions --- how many THOUSANDS of people are employees of the Church?

See if teddy/kerry can afford to pay for all the welfare added for their immoral buddies.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

So fire the homosexuals, they shouldn't be working for the Catholic Church anyway. Then the case can go before the SCOTUS and either go the right way, fine, or the wrong way, and the infection comes to a head.

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

[johnmorris886]

''The consensus is people will comply with the law.''

"The laws of nature are the laws of God, whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to Him, from whose punishment they cannot protect us. All human laws which contradict His laws we are in conscience bound to disobey." George Mason

[longtermmemmory]

Is anyone in mass trying to do anything to stop the May 17 abomination? If anything on May 17 it will be an excellent time to put the actual language fo the Federal Marriage Amendment out to the public.

We can even put it to the senior citizen voting block that homosexuals will be raiding their precious social security benefits in order to fund their sexual lifestyle.

It is difficult to envision the sacrifices at normandy being conducted in the name of taxpayer funding of homosexual sex.

Remeber the FMA DEFINES marriage, it is not a prohibition per se because by making an affirmative statement it also negates all other social engineering permutations.

[wrathof59]

Maybe Barney Frank can hire them all as congressional aides!

[melsec]

I don't suppose simply keeping homosexuals out of jobs where their very homosexuality is a conflict of interest is an option?

The Catholic Church is big enough and powerful enough to stand on principal and bring this to a head (no pun intended). I am interested to see if the church wimps out and makes accomodation. We are supposed to be in the world but not of the world. Line in the sand time. Bets anyone?

Mel

[Arthur McGowan]

The answer is simple: Shut down the schools and hospitals. As the dead pile up in the streets, there will be a rethinking of this issue. And Catholic schools are a poor substitute for homeschooling, anyway. We don't need them.

[Arthur McGowan]

"The laws of nature are the laws of God, whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to Him, from whose punishment they cannot protect us. All human laws which contradict His laws we are in conscience bound to disobey." George Mason

John Ashcroft BOASTED on Larry King that he voted for the FACE Act, which punishes people who try to protect innocent people from being murdered (i.e., babies about to be murdered in abortion clinics). He also promised (and he has fulfilled that promise) to prevent anyone in the U.S. from protecting the lives of babies in abortion clinics. Which means that John Ashcroft utterly rejects George Mason's (and Western Civilization's) principle that an unjust law is null and must be disobeyed.

[GulliverSwift]

People who are indifferent on the issue of homosexuality should start realizing that the attempt to legalize homosexual marriage is more an attempt to destroy the separation of church and state than anything else. Canadian Christians are on the verge of being harrassed by their government for merely believing the Bible. This will come to America if "gay" marriage is foisted on us. Many will not protest since they don't really care about the issue. But they will be effected by it at some point once freedom of conscience is first undermined.

[Arthur McGowan]

I am interested to see if the church wimps out...

"IF"?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahaha!!!!

You must have meant "how" or "when"!

[melsec]

You must have meant "how" or "when"!

I was taking into account the possiblity of a miracle. I believe they still happen!

Mel

[steplock]

You must like gramsci too!

As Antonio Gramsci directed almost 100 years ago ....

...

E. Both Capitalism and Judaeo-Christian culture must be destroyed before a Communist revolution can succeed

Religious sentiment cannot be destroyed through legislation, as Lenin believed, but must be redirected from the divine to the state

---Terror will only drive Religion underground
---Religion will then reemerge when Leninism fails
---So Religion must be destroyed in the minds of men

Infiltrate religious academies and become priests and clergymen

---Subtly promote heresy within religious organizations
---Infiltrators must act so as to discredit the church

------Cause financial and sexual scandals
------See that this is given a high profile in the news
------Like-minded infiltrators in the media will cooperate

---Once religion is discredited from within, continuously promote the idea that only the state can solve the problems that have been traditionally brought before the church


http://www.gohotsprings.com/focus/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=799

[patriciaruth]

In California, the Catholic Church has been ordered by the California Supreme Court to provide contraceptives as part of its employee health benefits plan.

This is nation-wide problem. Do religious institutions have a right to PRACTICE their beliefs?

[hunter112]

I don't suppose simply keeping homosexuals out of jobs where their very homosexuality is a conflict of interest is an option?

Well, what essential religious purpose does it serve for the Catholic Church to run institutions of higher education that do not offer purely religious training, or hospitals that treat people other than Catholics? To the extent that the churches operate within the private sector, engaging in businesses that people of any denomination, or of no religion at all, can operate, why should those enterprises be exempt from the laws that govern all businesses?

We all appreciate that the Catholic Church built universities and hospitals where there were none. But this is the 21st Century, and the laws that apply to all should apply to them. If you want to change those laws, fine, but the fact that Catholic values are out of the mainstream (i.e., contraceptives) does not give them the right to deprive ordinary human beings of their basic dignities. It's obvious that Catholic institutions value the services of people whose faith is not strict Catholic, why not value their right to make their own moral decisions within the law?

[melsec]

Do religious institutions have a right to PRACTICE their beliefs?

Of course they do and must! Therefore they MUST disobey these rulings. The Church needs strong leaders and leadership to take on these courts or they need strong individuals who are prepared to suffer in order to shame the leadership. If all the Catholics in CA opposed these rulings by continuing to do what the CHurch told them then do you expect that we would see thousands of Catholics going off to jail or would we see a change in the law. The right to practise your belefs is only yours when you choose to exercise that right. It is not given or taken by any court or any government - it is God endowed. Mel

[rogator]

"why should those enterprises be exempt from the laws that govern all businesses?"

They should be allowed to follow the moral guidelines they have always followed.
If the state insists they violate these moral guidelines to operate their schools and hospitals, they should shut down their schools and hospitals and let the state deal with the results. Taxes may go up a little as the kids go into the public school system.