Catholic charity's appeal over gay adoption fails

[rossum]

From the BBC:A Roman Catholic adoption charity’s appeal to be allowed to discriminate against gay people wanting it to place children with them has been rejected.

Catholic Care wanted exemption from new anti-discrimination laws so it could limit services provided to homosexual couples on religious grounds.

The Charity Commission said gay people were suitable parents and religious views did not justify discrimination.

Source: bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11019895

rossum

 

[doanli]

Very sad for British children.

 

[SunnaB16]

Why doesnt Catholic Care take the bull by the horns and defy the Charity Commission? As Catholics, we have a responsibility to combat the results of evil legislation, and, if handing helpless children over to same-sex shackups isnt CHILD ABUSE, then what is it?!!!

There has to be a showdown, and the sooner, the better. Carrying on like a bunch of wimps isn`t the right way.

Instead of continuously retreating, we should downface the enemy, now that hes so visible. Were in a spiritual war, and our counter-attack is long overdue. We should be praying that our spiritual leaders will see the reality, and have the courage to say and do what God expects of them. Ditto for the rest of us.

"United, we stand! Divided, we fall!!"

im fed up with this continuous retreat!*** ***Is there any backbone left?*** ***Were supposed to be The Church MILITANT!

Thanks be to God for the Manhattan Declaration! May it be followed by many others, and may its words be put into action!

 

[Teelynn]

Why doesnt Catholic Care take the bull by the horns and defy the Charity Commission? As Catholics, we have a responsibility to combat the results of evil legislation, and, if handing helpless children over to same-sex shackups isnt CHILD ABUSE, then what is it?!!!

There has to be a showdown, and the sooner, the better. Carrying on like a bunch of wimps isn`t the right way.

Instead of continuously retreating, we should downface the enemy, now that hes so visible. Were in a spiritual war, and our counter-attack is long overdue. We should be praying that our spiritual leaders will see the reality, and have the courage to say and do what God expects of them. Ditto for the rest of us.

"United, we stand! Divided, we fall!!"

im fed up with this continuous retreat!*** ***Is there any backbone left?*** ***Were supposed to be The Church MILITANT!

Thanks be to God for the Manhattan Declaration! May it be followed by many others, and may its words be put into action!

Very valid point. Are we not called to obey the law unless the law is in direct violation fo God’s law? If I am not mistaken, I think that’s how it goes.

 

[larkin31]

From the BBC:A Roman Catholic adoption charity’s appeal to be allowed to discriminate against gay people wanting it to place children with them has been rejected.

Catholic Care wanted exemption from new anti-discrimination laws so it could limit services provided to homosexual couples on religious grounds.

The Charity Commission said gay people were suitable parents and religious views did not justify discrimination.

Source: bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11019895

rossum

This is a British case, so it is not based on our Constitution. According to the case, the organization was given 21 months to comply. And now they are being directed to do so. And this group assists in “organizing” adoptions. They do not actually raise the children themselves (apparently). The article does not explain much…

 

[irishpatrick]

Catholic Charities of Boston fell under a similar fate regarding adoptions.

 

[larkin31]

Catholic Charities of Boston fell under a similar fate regarding adoptions.

Yes, because adoption is not a religious act. It is a transaction under law. So, as such it is subject to legal regulations, both state and fed.

 

[Julia1996]

If the Catholic Charity gives in and allows children to be placed with gay couples, then wouldn’t it be wrong?

And if the Catholic Charity does not give in and refuses to organize adoption placements with gay couples, then on the grounds of discrimination then they could be closed down.

All I can say is this seems to be a case of 进退维谷. It is a Chinese phrase which when translated literally means “forward-backward-into-canyon”. It means that it is basically a no-win situation, trapped between a rock and a hard place.

 

[irishpatrick]

Yes, because adoption is not a religious act. It is a transaction under law. So, as such it is subject to legal regulations, both state and fed.

Catholic Charities is a religious org. Fact.

Everything, including marriage in a church, can be said to be a transaction under the law. You help make my point.

 

[Julia1996]

Catholic Charities is a religious org. Fact.

Everything, including marriage in a church, can be said to be a transaction under the law. You help make my point.

Marriage in a church is a transaction under law? If both marriage and adoption are transactions under law, then why is it that the Church can refuse to allow gay marriages within the church but not refuse adoption of children by gay couples.

 

[scipio337]

Catholic Charities of Boston fell under a similar fate regarding adoptions.

Most people miss that.

boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/

They gave up the ghost, rather than conform to “anti-discrimitation” laws. I wonder why its legally defensibile, given the SCOTUS Boy Scouts of America v. Dale decision.

 

[Bob_Aliano]

If the Catholic Charity gives in and allows children to be placed with gay couples, then wouldn’t it be wrong?

And if the Catholic Charity does not give in and refuses to organize adoption placements with gay couples, then on the grounds of discrimination then they could be closed down.

All I can say is this seems to be a case of 进退维谷. It is a Chinese phrase which when translated literally means “forward-backward-into-canyon”. It means that it is basically a no-win situation, trapped between a rock and a hard place.

The greatest danger to the Church ignoring the law may be that the courts could invalidate any placements by the Church, in other words the children could be torn from their new homes and again orphaned. I’m not familiar with British Law but if there are any appeal processes remaining they must be pursued before continuing to place adoptions.

 

[scipio337]

Marriage in a church is a transaction under law? If both marriage and adoption are transactions under law, then why is it that the Church can refuse to allow gay marriages within the church but not refuse adoption of children by gay couples.

Its not federal law. I suppose the state of MA could.

 

[irishpatrick]

Most people miss that.

boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/

They gave up the ghost, rather than conform to “anti-discrimitation” laws. I wonder why its legally defensibile, given the SCOTUS Boy Scouts of America v. Dale decision.

Most people do not understand that the reason for the creation of hate crimes laws was not to punish hate, rather it was to extend an agenda that would never pass a constitutional test on its own merit. Hate crimes and discrimination laws will be used to force compliance of all manners of things, thereby bypassing our constitutional protections. Couple that with equal protection and you get a perfect storm of laws crafted to do exactly what we are seeing unfold before our eyes.

The spiritual battle is real and Christians (right now) are losing.

 

[larkin31]

Catholic Charities is a religious org. Fact.

Everything, including marriage in a church, can be said to be a transaction under the law. You help make my point.

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.

 

[larkin31]

Most people do not understand that the reason for the creation of hate crimes laws was not to punish hate, rather it was to extend an agenda that would never pass a constitutional test on its own merit.

No.

It was an attempt to counter the terror that hate crimes produce among the victimized groups and/or communities. They are in recognition of the extra effects and wounds of intimidation and terror that hate crimes are fueled by and meant to foment.

 

[rossum]

Catholic Charities is a religious org. Fact.

Everything, including marriage in a church, can be said to be a transaction under the law. You help make my point.

Not in a Catholic Church in the UK. The usual procedure is that after the religious service the couple go into the vestry and sign the legal papers in front of a Registrar. The religious and legal elements are separate.

Merely because an organisation is religious does not give it immunity from the law. Arranging adoptions is not seen as fundamental to the religious side of Catholicism, so the anti-discrimination law applies. Male priests are seen as fundamental so the anti-discrimination law do not apply in that case.

Other charities have either moved on to other charitable work or severed their ties with the Catholic Church. This case was the last one because the charity took the case to law.

rossum

 

[irishpatrick]

Not in a Catholic Church in the UK. The usual procedure is that after the religious service the couple go into the vestry and sign the legal papers in front of a Registrar. The religious and legal elements are separate.

Merely because an organisation is religious does not give it immunity from the law. Arranging adoptions is not seen as fundamental to the religious side of Catholicism, so the anti-discrimination law applies. Male priests are seen as fundamental so the anti-discrimination law do not apply in that case.

Other charities have either moved on to other charitable work or severed their ties with the Catholic Church. This case was the last one because the charity took the case to law.

rossum

I disagree on many levels, yet it is not worth pursuing because my points apply to the USA, not the rest of the world.

 

[irishpatrick]

No.

It was an attempt to counter the terror that hate crimes produce among the victimized groups and/or communities. They are in recognition of the extra effects and wounds of intimidation and terror that hate crimes are fueled by and meant to foment.

You go on thinking that if you. Than in ten years recall a person by the name of “Irishpatrick” told you the reality and you rejected it out of hand.

Hint: a crime is a crime.

 

[larkin31]

Not in a Catholic Church in the UK. The usual procedure is that after the religious service the couple go into the vestry and sign the legal papers in front of a Registrar. The religious and legal elements are separate.

Merely because an organisation is religious does not give it immunity from the law. Arranging adoptions is not seen as fundamental to the religious side of Catholicism, so the anti-discrimination law applies. Male priests are seen as fundamental so the anti-discrimination law do not apply in that case.

Other charities have either moved on to other charitable work or severed their ties with the Catholic Church. This case was the last one because the charity took the case to law.

rossum

This is quite similar to the situation in the US. Thanks for posting it.