Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jec1ny

I'm glad to hear this, but I think we should be prepared to be outraged by litagation that will result from this. Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America. Considerable amounts of tax money are given to the Church for its work with the poor, especially in big cities. This will be the hook, as will (possibly) be tax exemptions.

I hope I'm wrong.


8 posted on 11/22/2005 11:58:17 PM PST by Steely Tom (Fortunately, the Bill of Rights doesn't include the word 'is'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Steely Tom
Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America.

Actually, religious positions have always been exempt from overview by the Department of Labor, and to a lesser extent, the IRS. The "free exercise thereof" clause of the first amendment to the Constitution has been successfully applied in cases like this, as well as the "free association" phrase.

In short, the position of a priest is a specific, controlled, personal, and optional post that is wholly controlled by the religious organization sponsoring it. They would have absolutely no case.

Rest easy, it's been tried with Baptist and Protestant pastoral positions previously and has been quashed without exception.

13 posted on 11/23/2005 12:20:59 AM PST by Republicanus_Tyrannus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Steely Tom
"I'm glad to hear this, but I think we should be prepared to be outraged by litagation that will result from this. Left-wing troublemakers will attempt to define the priesthood as a form of employment, and can be expected to mount legal challenges against the Church in America. Considerable amounts of tax money are given to the Church for its work with the poor, especially in big cities. This will be the hook, as will (possibly) be tax exemptions.

I hope I'm wrong."

Permit me to set your mind at ease. Even the ACLU would rally to the Churches defense. No court would ever allow outsiders to dictate matters of faith to any church. Your concerns are baseless. The 1st ammnd protects churches from regulation in such matters.
16 posted on 11/23/2005 1:00:25 AM PST by jec1ny (Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domine Qui fecit caelum et terram.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Steely Tom
Considerable amounts of tax money are given to the Church for its work with the poor,

Actually, this is one of the things that has protected the Church, because it is more advantageous to the government than to the Church. These services are provided below cost and at expense to itself, with money coming from various Catholic sources as well. When the late Cardinal O'Connor had a conflict with the City of New York over city-sponsored sex education (naturally, featuring on-site contraceptive distribution and free rides to the abortion mill) in the group foster homes, he simply threatened to close them all. There was no way the city could provide these services itself, and he had them over a barrel - they gave in.

That said, there is a faint possibility that somebody will try to sue. I believe this is currently being attempted somewhere in Canada, but I could be wrong. Maybe it was just a threat. In any case, I don't think they'd get very far here, but you never know.

25 posted on 11/23/2005 3:43:57 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Steely Tom

You are right, but if the AmChurch loses all its wealth to save its soul, it is money well spent..a lot better than the "hush money" it has paid for years.


86 posted on 11/23/2005 7:37:35 AM PST by steve8714
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Steely Tom
they're already squacking but I could care less....at least we're getting our Church back...

the whole pedophile business with the priests...minority that they are...is deeply seeded with the entry into the priesthood of gay men.....

sometimes what passes for pedophilia is simply homosexual advances......

the other thing is, if a priest is truely a pedophile...goes after very young children of either sex.....there is a covert relationship between him and gay priests because they have the "goods' on each other......there is a cover-up and a willingness to let things just pass....

227 posted on 11/23/2005 11:21:35 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Steely Tom

Your scenario sent chills up my spine. I usually would have laughed it off, but after the CFR debacle, I don't put anything past our courts anymore.

(Of course, assuming Alito is confirmed, we might have a different court, but still my confidence is shaken.)


240 posted on 11/24/2005 6:29:21 AM PST by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson