If you were part of an RC adoption group, and a man applied for a placement job with you, imagine that you asked the question: "Do you support our traditional family outlook?"
And the man answers: "Well, I am a Republican."
My only point here has to do with communication.
What did the agency want to hear?
What did they hear instead?
Dear xzins,
'If you were part of an RC adoption group, and a man applied for a placement job with you, imagine that you asked the question: 'Do you support our traditional family outlook?'
"And the man answers: 'Well, I am a Republican.'"
First, I'll note that I personally find the abbreviation "RC" mildly offensive. It isn't too much work to write "Catholic."
Second, if I were interviewing someone, the exchange wouldn't have occurred this way.
I'd have asked, "Do you accept the teachings of the Catholic Church regarding adoption of children by homosexuals, namely that homosexual couples are not appropriate adoptive parents, and thus, we will not place children with homosexual adoptive parents?"
If he then answered, "Well, I am a Republican."
I'd reply, "That's nice, but I asked about your religious beliefs, not your political beliefs. We hire without regard to political affiliations. Do you accept the teaching of the Catholic Church as I just laid out?"
However, your analogy is flawed to begin with.
The Salvation Army person didn't ask whether the Catholic employee agreed with a specific point of putative Christian doctrine, but rather asked a much more general question.
The analagous question in your example should have been, "Do you believe and accept all the teachings of the Catholic Church?"
Further, you've mixed and matched categories.
The Salvation Army person asked about the Catholic employee's religious beliefs, not about his political beliefs. And the Catholic employee answered by stating his religious affiliation.
In your example, the question is about religious beliefs, and the answer is about political affiliation.
Nonetheless, even given the exchange as you present it, I would NOT have then answered that "that was why he was not selected for the position."
I'd have continued to work to clarify his answer.
In the actual circumstances laid out with the Salvation Army official and the Catholic employee, upon being told, "I'm a Catholic," I'd have either said, well, then, we erred, we thought you weren't a Christian, or if I were an anti-Catholic bigot, I'd have said:
"Well, that's fine. Do you also consider yourself to be a Christian?"
If the fellow then answered anything approximating "yes," I'D have taken his word for it. Of course, a bigoted anti-Catholic Salvation Army official might further continue:
"But do you accept the five solas, do you believe in salvation by faith alone, grace alone...?" or whatnot, forcing my own personal idiosyncratic definition of Christian faith on this poor Catholic slob.
And then excluded him because I was an anti-Catholic bigot.
That being said, I still maintain that folks have the right to discriminate against Catholics, even in a bigoted, prejudicial manner, when hiring for their ecclesial bodies.
sitetest