You know not of which you speak. The procreation and education of children is the primary end of marriage. This deals directly with a Sacrament. A faith-based organization must be allowed to act as it will in accordance to their faith, which includes not placing children in a toxic environment. Faith does not stop at the Church door. As a Catholic, it should permeate every fiber of our being. This kind of hatred towards true morality must come to an end.No. You don’t know your law. You can’t keep arguing “coulds” and make any legal sense. Law is about what IS.
The adoption service is a public service done outside of the sacraments and outside the sanctuary. They go beyond counseling and assist with persons and the legal/civil documents. Adoption is not a practice of the central tenets of a faith, and it does not occur within the sanctuary. That it is done BY a religious organization is irrelevant in this case, the same way that systematically charging Muslims higher tuition at their schools would be a violation of discrimination law. Refusing to marry Muslims in their sanctuaries is not.
You are not making a legal argument.You know not of which you speak. The procreation and education of children is the primary end of marriage. This deals directly with a Sacrament. A faith-based organization must be allowed to act as it will in accordance to their faith, which includes not placing children in a toxic environment. Faith does not stop at the Church door. As a Catholic, it should permeate every fiber of our being. This kind of hatred towards true morality must come to an end.
Sure I am. Under the protections guaranteed in the United States Constitution (I cannot speak for Britain, but in that country, Anti-Catholicism was codified into law), the government can dictate hoe religion is practiced. This goes beyond simple protection of worship, but all manner of exercise of that faith. Such a law in the United States would be deemed unconstitutional.You are not making a legal argument.
In the US, church tax exempt status also has rules and regulations. And churches must follow fed employment law, etc.Sure I am. Under the protections guaranteed in the United States Constitution (I cannot speak for Britain, but in that country, Anti-Catholicism was codified into law), the government can dictate hoe religion is practiced. This goes beyond simple protection of worship, but all manner of exercise of that faith. Such a law in the United States would be deemed unconstitutional.
Not necessarily. A Church is exempt in some cases. For example, a Catholic School is not bound by federal law (as public schools are) in hiring staff and faculty. A Church can restrict its hiring to only the faithful. Also a religious organization is protected from going against their principles. It appears that this is not true in the UK.In the US, church tax exempt status also has rules and regulations. And churches must follow fed employment law, etc.
It is currently a registered charity and so gets special tax treatment. The ruling is from the Charities Commission. If it fails to follow the ruling then it will no longer legally be a charity and will have to pay more tax.And that’s what I am trying to understand. Catholic Charities is not a public institution. It is a private organization. So why is the situation so different and how could CC restructure to keep operating morally and serving the children?
I KNOW. But there are rules to follow to maintain the “exempt” status.Not necessarily. A Church is exempt in some cases. For example, a Catholic School is not bound by federal law (as public schools are) in hiring staff and faculty. A Church can restrict its hiring to only the faithful. Also a religious organization is protected from going against their principles. It appears that this is not true in the UK.
Limiting activity to ones principles does not threaten this status.I KNOW. But there are rules to follow to maintain the “exempt” status.
You’re speaking vaguely. It sure might if the “activity” is deemed in violation of a statute. And remember, it is not the case that ALL religious activity is protected from sanction and regulation. This has NEVER been the case in America.Limiting activity to ones principles does not threaten this status.
That is 100% correct, yet it is also the tactic being slowly used by the left to push churches into a self-contained box, than one day the left will attack that box (think China’s official Catholic Church here).Given the options, I hope the group folds their tent. I think it stinks for the kids, but there really is no option. A Catholic group should not do something contrary to Church teaching.
Actually, in the US, an organization’s tax exempt status is not tied to other types of regulations. An organization could not lose its tax exempt status for failing to follow applicable employment or public safety laws. It might lose its license to do business or to be open to the public but tax exempt status is tied solely to IRS rules and regulations.You’re speaking vaguely. It sure might if the “activity” is deemed in violation of a statute. And remember, it is not the case that ALL religious activity is protected from sanction and regulation. This has NEVER been the case in America.
The free exercise clause protects all religious activity, and is not limited to worship, despite what the heretics and heathens in Washington sayYou’re speaking vaguely. It sure might if the “activity” is deemed in violation of a statute. And remember, it is not the case that ALL religious activity is protected from sanction and regulation. This has NEVER been the case in America.
There are other countries, however, where religion is very closely allied with government and where nearly everything mentioned in sacred texts is permissible by law. Problem is, they tend to be fundamentalism Muslim countries. But there you have it!
I meant, say, if you endorse a particular candidate or party for office, etc., or violate other rules around the money collection and use. Exemption is not unregulated.Actually, in the US, an organization’s tax exempt status is not tied to other types of regulations. An organization could not lose its tax exempt status for failing to follow applicable employment or public safety laws. It might lose its license to do business or to be open to the public but tax exempt status is tied solely to IRS rules and regulations.
The “heathens” in New York and Philadelphia who wrote the document you are referring to did not mean to “protect all religious activity.”The free exercise clause protects all religious activity,
Exactly! But that’s because those are IRS rules. It is not the case, as you stated earlier, that this is how it has always been in America. Faith based charities used to operate independant of government regulation. Only decades after the institution of the federal income tax did regulation of charitable organizations become the norm.I meant, say, if you endorse a particular candidate or party for office, etc., or violate other rules around the money collection and use. Exemption is not unregulated.
fair enoughExactly! But that’s because those are IRS rules. It is not the case, as you stated earlier, that this is how it has always been in America. Faith based charities used to operate independant of government regulation. Only decades after the institution of the federal income tax did regulation of charitable organizations become the norm.
Wrong again. The free exercise clause goes beyond worshipThe “heathens” in New York and Philadelphia who wrote the document you are referring to did not mean to “protect all religious activity.”
I did not say that it did NOT go “beyond worship.” You claimed that it covers “all religious activity.” That is clearly false, and was never meant to be true by the founders (those “heathens”, apparently).Wrong again. The free exercise clause goes beyond worship
The free exercise clause protects all religious activity, and is not limited to worship, despite what the heretics and heathens in Washington say