Recently, Eastside Catholic High School caused an uproar when they dismissed their vice-principal who entered a same-sex “marriage” in violation of church teaching. Posted on 02/05/2014 3:50:49 PM PST by fwdude
Recently, Eastside Catholic High School caused an uproar when they dismissed their vice-principal who entered a same-sex “marriage” in violation of church teaching.
In a story that could have implications for this case, as well as for churches everywhere, last week the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed a complaint against a Catholic girl’s prep school which refused to hire a man who is “married” to another man.
Matthew Barrett applied for a job as the food service director at the Fontbonne Academy in Milton, Massachusetts and was offered the job. When his pre-employment form listed him as having a “husband” the school informed him that they could not hire him.
The news is not that the homosexual community is suing people for doing things they don’t like. That’s actually pretty old news.
The news here is that they’re suing churches, something they assured us would NEVER happen because they just respect religious freedom far too much.
To appreciate the significance of this latest development, a brief review of where we’ve come from is helpful.
Originally they just wanted homosexuality removed from the list of mental disorders. “You don’t have to like it or agree with it” they told us, “all we want is to no longer be told we’re crazy for having feelings we can’t control.”
Then they wanted to get rid of the ban on homosexuality in the military. “Don’t ask, don’t tell. C’mon be reasonable. All we want is the right to serve our country without being forced to lie about who we are.”
Then homosexuality was added to the list of protected classes in non-discrimination laws. “Of course we’re not trying to stop you from having your own beliefs or expressing them however you want, we just don’t want to lose our jobs because we’re gay. It’s not like we’re trying to get married.”
Then it was domestic partnerships with some of the rights and benefits of marriage. “All we want is the right to visit our loved ones in the hospital. How heartless can you be?”
Then domestic partnerships were expanded to have all the rights and benefits of marriage. “We don’t want to change marriage, all we want is the same rights and benefits of marriage. We’re tired of being treated like second class citizens.” And they told that story about wanting to visit people in the hospital again even though it was a non-issue.
Then they decided they needed to redefine marriage after all. “All we want is to change civil marriage. We wouldn’t dream of interfering with a churches right to define marriage however it wants and act accordingly. We love religious freedom. Hey, I go to church too.” And they told the story about wanting to visit loved ones in the hospital...again...because it still worked. Tehehe.
And now they’re suing churches.
Despite the complaint against the Catholic school for making decisions consistent with their church teaching, Bennet Klein, the GLAD lawyer representing Barrett is STILL trying to make the case that he supports religious freedom.
There’s a Baghdad Bob component to all of this that’s actually kind of funny.
In a statement on their website, Bennett Klein, the GLAD lawyer representing Barrett said, “Our laws carefully balance the important values of religious liberty and non-discrimination. When Fontbonne Academy fired Matt from a job that has nothing to do with religion, they came down on the wrong side of the law.”
You see, all of you who think your religious freedoms are being taken away are mistaken. They love religious freedom. In reality they’re just clarifying your confusion about what religion actually is.
In the future, if you have any questions about which parts of your church actually have to do with your religion you can check with your local GLAD lawyer. They’re happy to serve.
Lots of people have been observing the conflict between freedom and the sexual liberty movement from the sideline for decades. I get it. Conflict really isn’t that fun. And isn’t life more fun when everyone thinks you’re awesome?
We’ve come a long ways since homosexuality was removed from the list of mental disorders and you’ve been quiet all the while. They’re suing churches now. They moved out of the closet, slept on the couch for a while, eventually sent you to the guestroom when they took over the master bedroom, and now you’re standing with all your stuff in the front lawn while a guy is changing the locks on the doors.
At what point does ones desire to avoid conflict become cowardice? It’s a question worth asking because there are tens of millions of people in America handing over their freedoms without so much as a disapproving look. After all, there’s so much negativity already.
Maybe you resent the implication. Fair enough. Then answer this question. Where is your line in the sand?
Is it when they sue you? Is it when you can no longer get a business license because the state mandated non-discrimination policy to get a business license violates your beliefs? Is it when they sue your church? When they sue your friend’s church? When they close your church? When they put your pastor in jail? When they take your kids from you to prevent your brand of hate from being spread to the next generation?
Or perhaps there is nothing you won’t put up with so long as no one accuses you of being “divisive” or “political”.
Winston Churchill once quipped that an appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.
That’s certainly one option.
Or, those who haven’t been eaten yet could just decide to stop the crocodile. Up to you. If you make him stop he’ll certainly be upset with you and may even have some harsh words...in public.
Your motives will be misrepresented, they’ll say you hate gay people, and if you’re a pastor someone is sure to accuse you of co-opting the gospel for political purposes. But, it could allow us to preserve the liberty so many risked their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor for. Are you sure you’re ready for that?
Yeah, may not be worth it. Here, eat this guy.
The thing is. My sister is a Catholic school teacher. Woman married to a man. (sad that we have to spell that out these days). Any way, if she were to get divorced and start dating or living with someone else they could fire her. There is a morals clause in the contract. Now if she just got divorced and did not remarry or co-habitate or date she could keep her job.
And the cowardly republicans in congress sit back and enable his destruction of the moral foundation of the country.
This is basically the way that it is done in much of Europe. That does not keep the gays from demanding their right to be married in a church. They demand affirmation, not toleration.
At this point, it seems the possibilities are without limit. Reality is whatever you want it to be, and if some wet blanket tries to intrude truth into your world, the state will run interference for you. A nation of children, the land of Oz. Don’t look behind that curtain, you might see the truth of AIDS, stds, cancers, shortened lives, molested children, diseased minds, etc.
next will be the homosexual led effort to lower age of consent laws.
Exactly. Nothing can ever validate this sickness, so the less things work to do so, the harder they try.
Prediction: within 5-10 years, Christian churches which adhere to Biblical teachings will lose their tax-exempt status because of their stand against homosexuality. Related prediction: Bibles will be banned and confiscated as
“hate speech”. it’s not difficult to see this coming.
Catholic ping!
I was absolutely amazed about recently when I traveled throughout Europe visiting cathedrals. There were seats for thousands and they didn’t have 50 people including the pastor/priest and choir.
At Coventry Cathedral in UK there were 12 of us in the pews for a regular Sunday service. If they didn’t charge admission for tourists to see the structures they would go broke.
“I predict the next move will be to sue a Parish, or Diocese, for refusing to ‘marry’ a homosexual couple. In this regard, they’ll try to have the tax-exempt status removed, because the Church is denying someone something that is legal in that state; a civil marriage.”
I don’t know if it is the next thing. But it is no more ridiculous than telling someone in 1994 that by 2014 17+ states will have recognized ‘gay marriage’ and there will be several lawsuits against businesses who refused to recognize them for religious reasons.
The Church wasn’t punished for not accepting civil divorce and remarriage. But it definitely wasn’t framed as a civil right at the time like ‘gay marriage’ is now, at least that I am aware. On the other hand I don’t even know if anyone gets turned away from businesses or hiring for being civilly remarried, so maybe there was a lot less folks to complain when it did/does rarely happen?
“In my opinion, the Catholic Church in the US should stop being an agent of the State...”
That’s probably what is going to end up happening, either by trying to avoid punishment or as punishment for not accepting whatever impossibility the state is calling marriage at the time.
George Weigal wrote a little about it up here:
http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2012/11/the-crisis-of-a-second-obama-administration
Freegards
“Then I saw an apparition of the Mother of God, and she said that the tribulation would be very great. She added that people must pray fervently with outstretched arms, be it only long enough to say three Our Fathers. This was the way her Son prayed for them on the Cross. They must rise at twelve at night, and pray in this manner; and they must keep coming to the Church. They must pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome... These were all good and devout people, and they did not know where help and guidance should be sought. There were no traitors and enemies among them, yet they were afraid of one another... “
“I saw more martyrs, not now but in the future ... I saw the secret sect relentlessly undermining the great Church. Near them I saw a horrible beast coming up from the sea. All over the world, good and devout people, especially the clergy, were harassed, oppressed, and put into prison ... “
“Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches closed down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took violent action. But it did not last long... “
A few prophecies of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich. Prepare for battle.
I predict the next move will be to sue a Parish, or Diocese, for refusing to ‘marry’ a homosexual couple.
__________________________________________________________
It’s closer than many want to admit:
Judge Rules Christian facility cannot ban same-sex civil union ceremony on its own premises
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/judge-rules-christian-facility-cannot-ban-same-sex-civil-union-ceremony-on/
This is settled law. It has been upheld on numerous occasions and the people bringing the suite should be forced to pay the defendants, all court costs and a massive fine.
That is correct. The Church is against divorce and RE-Marriage. They will not marry someone in the Church who has a valid marriage already in the Church that has not been annulled. Annulment is relatively easy to get, unfortunately.
“Actually, if we really were still a FREE country, “discrimination” would still be an unalienable right of EVERY free person: business owners, individuals, corporations, etc.”
Absolutely. Isn’t this ‘freedom of association’?
There is no better example of the *camel’s nose under the tent* theory than the above article. Ecclesiastes Ch. 3 was written for a purpose.
“I was absolutely amazed about recently when I traveled throughout Europe visiting cathedrals.”
____________________________________________________
Were you in any of the former Communist countries of central Europe?
While living in Slovakia, I attended one of the three beautiful Catholic churches in old town Bratislava.
The attendance was quite good.
While I grew up as an Episcopalian (the very now disgraced denomination in America) I considered myself to be worthy of taking communion in the Slovak church.
I now live in the very Catholic country, Philippines, where our church in a small town is 300 years old. My 3 yr old son was baptized there when he was an infant.
It begins by asking toleration. Its friends say to the majority: You need not be afraid of us; we are few and weak; only let us alone; we shall not disturb the faith of others. The Church has her standards of doctrine; of course we shall never interfere with them; we only ask for ourselves to be spared interference with our private opinions.
Indulged in this for a time, error goes on to assert equal rights. Truth and error are two balancing forces. The Church shall do nothing which looks like deciding between them; that would be partiality. It is bigotry to assert any superior right for the truth. We are to agree to differ and any favoring of the truth, because it is truth, is partisanship. What the friends of truth and error hold in common is fundamental. Anything on which they differ is “ipso facto” non-essential. Anybody who makes account of such a thing is a disturber of the peace of the church. Truth and error are two co-ordinate powers, and the great secret of church-statesmanship is to preserve the balance between them.
From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy. Truth started with tolerating; it comes to be merely tolerated and that only for a time. Error claims a preference for its judgments on all disputed points. It puts men into position, not as at first in spite of their departure from the Church’s faith, but in consequence of it. Their recommendation is that they repudiate that faith, and position is given them to teach others to repudiate it, and make them skillful in combating it." (pp. 195-196)
From: “THE CONSERVATIVE REFORMATION AND ITS THEOLOGY as represented in the Augsburg Confession and in the history and literature of the Evangelical Lutheran Church” by Charles P. Krauth, D.D. (1871). [Note date]
So was the right of states to pass their own marriage amendments, but look where we are now?
We are now a lawless nation.
They’ll be suing to end the charitable status of religious institutions within the decade.
You have hit the nail on the head. Since there is no penalty for law suites that simply take up court time. There is no disincentive for the grievance community to not sue.
Also the Justices change their minds even when the constitution doesn’t change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.