NJ rules against church

[aggiecatholic05]

this is actually about a methodist church, but it could just have easily been us so i put it here. if that means its on the wrong forum then please move it.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081229/ap_on_re_us/civil_unions;_ylt=Alvf2vLm7fcvhDxx5JHcmIk7Xs8F

A church group that owns beachfront property discriminated against a lesbian couple by not allowing them to rent the locale for their civil union ceremony, a New Jersey department ruled Monday in a case that has become a flash point in the nation’s gay rights battle.

Opponents of gay marriage cite the case as a prime example of their contention that by recognizing same-sex couples, states are interfering with religious freedoms.

“It’s something we have to be careful about,” said the Alliance Defense Fund’s Raum. “As the rights of same-sex couples increase, the tendency is to have it conflict with the First Amendment rights of religious organizations.”

whats next a gay couple suing because they cant get married in one of our cathedrals? the aresting of bishops for discrimination? where does it end?

 

[JReducation]

this is actually about a methodist church, but it could just have easily been us so i put it here. if that means its on the wrong forum then please move it.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081229/ap_on_re_us/civil_unions;_ylt=Alvf2vLm7fcvhDxx5JHcmIk7Xs8F

whats next a gay couple suing because they cant get married in one of our cathedrals? the aresting of bishops for discrimination? where does it end?

Unless the judge is a complete nut job, there is more here than meets the eye. The article says that they field suit under the reight to equal access. In most states the right to equal access only applies to public facilities. That leads me to believe that this site was used for more than worship. Schools and hospitals, stores and movie theatres are bound by the right of access. I’ve never seen it applied to a church. I’ve seen churches provide ramps and the like of their own free will.

I’m not a lawyer, so I can’t say that I’m right either. But I have been in administration of public/private institutions and have never seen this law applied this way.

I can’t wait to see how it is resolved.

Thanks for sharing.

JR

 

[rpp]

This was inevitable. I fear the worst.

 

[Elizabeth502]

whats next a gay couple suing because they cant get married in one of our cathedrals? the aresting of bishops for discrimination?

Question #1: Answer, Yes.
Question #2: Answer, They’ll be sued, not arrested.

Only one of many examples demonstrating importance of limiting marriage to one man, one woman. Anything else is a slippery slope, undermining both the religious order and the civil order of society.

 

[Dale_M]

Unless the judge is a complete nut job, there is more here than meets the eye.

Yes, the Camp Meeting Association received a “Green Acres” tax exemption for their pavilion on the condition that it be available to the public “on an equal basis.” By allowing heterosexual couples to wed there, but deny it to gay couples, the Camp Meeting Association was breaking the law.
nj.gov/oag/newsreleases08/pr20081229a.html

Contrary to the title of this thread, the Camp Meeting Association is not a church, nor is its pavilion.

 

[aggiecatholic05]

Yes, the Camp Meeting Association received a “Green Acres” tax exemption for their pavilion on the condition that it be available to the public “on an equal basis.” By allowing heterosexual couples to wed there, but deny it to gay couples,

yes but they signed that agreement before there was such a thing as gay weddings or civil unions. the state changed the rules midgame. thats like the four year old who claims all red cards beat three of a kind.

 

[Lujack]

What makes this unique, I think, are the beachfront laws in New Jersey. There is probably more than meets the eye, and my guess is that this beach was dredged or the dunes were fortified at some point by the Army Corps of Engineers, or some other public organization.

In New Jersey, there was a real problem with beachfront condos closing off beaches to the public, and laws tightened up quite a bit to ensure public access. Its unfortunate that it worked out this way in this case, but the laws make sense, and keep the beaches free from becoming private beaches.

 

[Sabda]

What makes this unique, I think, are the beachfront laws in New Jersey. There is probably more than meets the eye, and my guess is that this beach was dredged or the dunes were fortified at some point by the Army Corps of Engineers, or some other public organization.

In New Jersey, there was a real problem with beachfront condos closing off beaches to the public, and laws tightened up quite a bit to ensure public access. Its unfortunate that it worked out this way in this case, but the laws make sense, and keep the beaches free from becoming private beaches.

Does NJ not have an area set aside for public beaches? If I buy property with a beach attached than as far as I’m concerned that stretch of beach is mine and it’s private. Does this law only pertain to condos or does it include houses also?

In regard to the article, unfortunately it does state that camp did have a clause in there that allowed for public use. When NJ ok’ed gay marriage the camp should have had that clause taken out.

 

[Sabda]

Yes, the Camp Meeting Association received a “Green Acres” tax exemption for their pavilion on the condition that it be available to the public “on an equal basis.” By allowing heterosexual couples to wed there, but deny it to gay couples, the Camp Meeting Association was breaking the law.
nj.gov/oag/newsreleases08/pr20081229a.html

Contrary to the title of this thread, the Camp Meeting Association is not a church, nor is its pavilion.

From the article you posted it does state that the CMA is affliated with the United Methodist Church.

From the article:

but the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association denied their request because it said the civil union ceremony conflicted with the religious beliefs of the United Methodist Church.

The Yahoo News article list them as a church group. They may not be a church in and of themselves but they are affliated with a church.

 

[aggiecatholic05]

They may not be a church in and of themselves but they are affliated with a church.

it makes me think if the knights of columbus had a hall the rented out. if they made it clear they wouldnt rent it to things that went against the catholic church. would they have been sued?

where does it stop? what happend to the right to refuse service?

 

[Soutane]

it makes me think if the knights of columbus had a hall the rented out. if they made it clear they wouldnt rent it to things that went against the catholic church. would they have been sued?

where does it stop? what happend to the right to refuse service?

It DID happen to the KofC in Canada. women rented the hall but ONLY after signing the contract did they tell the Knights that it was a reception for a so-called same sex marriage.The Knights understandably refused to allow the reception and they were successfully sued in court.It is obvious that this was done deliberately and with malice.It will happen in the u.s.a. too.

 

[Dale_M]

yes but they signed that agreement before there was such a thing as gay weddings or civil unions. the state changed the rules midgame.

In which case the Camp Meeting Association should have given up their tax exemption, which was based upon their willingness to treat all of the public equally. After being sued, they decided simply to stop doing any weddings there… which I guess is equal treatment.
But perhaps they should have taken that action before hand.

The Yahoo News article list them as a church group. They may not be a church in and of themselves but they are affliated with a church.

Okay, but unlike churches, they don’t qualify for tax exemptions on their property. The CMA applied for a special tax exemption which was granted to them conditional on their willingness to not discriminate.

it makes me think if the knights of columbus had a hall the rented out. if they made it clear they wouldnt rent it to things that went against the catholic church. would they have been sued?

In your example, the KoC would have a policy which would have prevented them for applying for the Green Acres tax exemption, since this tax exemption demanded equal use of facilities by the public. So I don’t think this case applies to your example.

 

[aggiecatholic05]

It DID happen to the KofC in Canada. women rented the hall but ONLY after signing the contract did they tell the Knights that it was a reception for a so-called same sex marriage.The Knights understandably refused to allow the reception and they were successfully sued in court.It is obvious that this was done deliberately and with malice.It will happen in the u.s.a. too.

i hadnt heard that one. ver sad. and yes i think youre right, if it hasnt happened here yet it will.

 

[TShawn]

For what it is worth as someone from the LGBTQ community, I actually side with the church because I do believe religious freedom (of not only beliefs but convictions) should remain protected. I would never approach a church to marry me if I knew they were against it. I would take issue with them if they treated me badly because of how I am, but that’s another issue. I feel badly for the women, but I think they should have chosen a place where they would have been welcome. I don’t expect the Catholic Church change Her teachings for me, and I would not like to see Her forced to anymore than I would like to be forced into doing something I didn’t agree with. - Tshawn

 

[Lujack]

Does NJ not have an area set aside for public beaches? If I buy property with a beach attached than as far as I’m concerned that stretch of beach is mine and it’s private. Does this law only pertain to condos or does it include houses also?

Well, if you lived in New Jersey, and had a beach house, at some point, your dunes would need to be replenished. The deal the state offered was that you could either pay for the dunes out of your own pocket, or provide some public access, in which case the state would pay for it. That’s the way I understand the laws, at least.

 

[Sabda]

Well, if you lived in New Jersey, and had a beach house, at some point, your dunes would need to be replenished. The deal the state offered was that you could either pay for the dunes out of your own pocket, or provide some public access, in which case the state would pay for it. That’s the way I understand the laws, at least.

Ah, I see that makes sense.

 

[KathleenElsie]

For what it is worth as someone from the LGBTQ community, I actually side with the church because I do believe religious freedom (of not only beliefs but convictions) should remain protected. I would never approach a church to marry me if I knew they were against it. I would take issue with them if they treated me badly because of how I am, but that’s another issue. I feel badly for the women, but I think they should have chosen a place where they would have been welcome. I don’t expect the Catholic Church change Her teachings for me, and I would not like to see Her forced to anymore than I would like to be forced into doing something I didn’t agree with. - Tshawn

Thank you for your response. I believe we all have rights and responsibilities. We are all responsible for treating others with respect and dignity. We all have the right to our firmly held religious conviction and beliefs. So I guess we agree in many more ways then we disagree.

PAX