Catholic Church gives D.C. ultimatum

[Si modo]

heh...Ravi is right almost 99.9% of the time.

Si modo...what is the District telling CC to do?

Who to employ.

(a) This subchapter shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.​

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

 

[Intense]

The Obligation of The Catholic Church is to God. Government has no Authority dictating Church Policy in Any way. By voluntary agreement The Church chooses to sign agreements with Government that are mutually beneficial to Joint Cause. Should those agreements become hurtful to Either Entity, they should be Nullified.

The Church is not going to Give To The Poor because of Government Contracts. You All should know better than to presume that. However true it is that the Church helps Government distribute more efficiently and effectively, It should not be made to suffer or be taken advantage of, because of the means of It's Helpfulness. The Church will continue what It has always done, outside of Government Contract. The Church is not the Property of The State. Our Minds are Not the Property of The State. Equal Justice is Not Served in This. The Government seems to forget It's limits as easily as it forgets It's Purpose for Being.

 

[Shogun]

Indeed. just like they once said about supporting the union of ******* and good white girls and any other example of mixing races.

And don't forget their support of slavery.

Indeed.. OR their willingness to make a deal with Nazis.. a move which largely cave validation to the upstart political movement.

so, the lesson here is that Catholics CAN make deals with NAZIS... but not fags.

 

[manifold]

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Can someone explain to me how the second sentence doesn't contradict the first?

 

[Shogun]

The Obligation of The Catholic Church is to God. Government has no Authority dictating Church Policy in Any way. By voluntary agreement The Church chooses to sign agreements with Government that are mutually beneficial to Joint Cause. Should those agreements become hurtful to Either Entity, they should be Nullified.

The Church is not going to Give To The Poor because of Government Contracts. You All should know better than to presume that. However true it is that the Church helps Government distribute more efficiently and effectively, It should not be made to suffer or be taken advantage of, because of the means of It's Helpfulness. The Church will continue what It has always done, outside of Government Contract. The Church is not the Property of The State. Our Minds are Not the Property of The State. Equal Justice is Not Served in This. The Government seems to forget It's limits as easily as it forgets It's Purpose for Being.

Trust me, I have no problem pulling all funds being doled out to faith based initiatives. Don't like the public standard regarding discrimination? Fine, don't take our money. Catholic Charities learned the same lesson regarding adopting kids to fags.

but hey.. nixing adoption agencies is the jesus way, right?

 

[Si modo]

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Can someone explain to me how the second sentence doesn't contradict the first?

Right.

 

[Si modo]

The Roman Catholic Church is a pro at playing politics. The District council doesn't stand a chance.

 

[Shogun]

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Can someone explain to me how the second sentence doesn't contradict the first?

it's a matter of public funding to a catholic suborganization that acts as the charity. No one expects catholics to let gays have weddings but they DO expect public money that funds a catholic charity to abide by the same employment requirements as anyone else.

Like I said... don't like the public standard then don't take the public money.

 

[Shogun]

The Roman Catholic Church is a pro at playing politics. The District council doesn't stand a chance.

yea.. that worked out with the catholic charity adoption venture, didn't it?

 

[JenyEliza]

No. I don't think they are bluffing about withdrawing funds. However, the Church is not in the habit of allowing the poor to suffer, politicians yes, the poor, no.

However, in this case, the church is allowing the poor to suffer to strongarm the politicians.

indeed. the same happened with adoption via Catholic Charities.

No, the RCC is refusing TO BE strongarmed into accepting positions that are contrary to the Church's core beliefs and teachings. The RCC refuses to be pushed into accepting that which is unacceptable to the Church.

In the case of adoptions, the Church agencies stopped assisting in cases where they were not allowed to honor the Church's position on Gay adoption (which is, it isn't done).

There were some government entities requiring that the Church's adoption agencies adopt out to gay couples. The RCC said "sorry, no can do". The government(s) said, "sorry, we can't work with you", and the RCC said "Okie dokie".

The RCC didn't do this to hurt anyone. The RCC simply honored its core beliefs. The RCC simply continued to be CATHOLIC.

And....now the RCC is doign the same with gay marriage. End of story.

 

[California Girl]

Just for the non-Catholics, who think the same sex marriage thing is an issue for the Catholic Church because the Church is anti-gay, the Catholic Church outlines 4 principles for marriage:

You are choose to marry, without external pressure.

You intend to remain together for the rest of your life.

You intend to remain faithful to one another.

Unless the bride is past childbearing age, you intend to have at least one child during the course of your marriage.

Marriage to Catholics is for the procreation of children.

 

[Modbert]

Excellent. Challenge my spelling... Nice. Congrats on that.

Fact is, the Catholic Church doesn't advocate stoning its flock, does it?

You're pissed because the Church doesn't do what you want it do to. Tough. If you're a Catholic, you should be used to having the Church do things that you disagree with. That's life in the Catholic faith.

They aren't gonna support Gay Marriage. End of Conversation. I don't know why the whining about stoning people or poor people suffering has become such an obsession with you but whatever.

I'm not pissed, I'm disappointed that the Church is not following the word of Jesus and the bible in this instance.

I don't expect the Catholic church to support Gay Marriage. However, much like you don't support Shiria Law I'm sure to be put forth in America, I don't want Church Doctrine to be making up our laws either. There is a thing called "seperation of church and state" that was stressed by many of our Founding Fathers including Jefferson. America was the first Liberal state, based on the ideology of Liberalism which one of the foundations was religious tolerance.

 

[Ravi]

heh...Ravi is right almost 99.9% of the time.

Si modo...what is the District telling CC to do?

Who to employ.

(a) This subchapter shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State, or to a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities.​

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Where in the article are you getting that from?

 

[California Girl]

Excellent. Challenge my spelling... Nice. Congrats on that.

Fact is, the Catholic Church doesn't advocate stoning its flock, does it?

You're pissed because the Church doesn't do what you want it do to. Tough. If you're a Catholic, you should be used to having the Church do things that you disagree with. That's life in the Catholic faith.

They aren't gonna support Gay Marriage. End of Conversation. I don't know why the whining about stoning people or poor people suffering has become such an obsession with you but whatever.

I'm not pissed, I'm disappointed that the Church is not following the word of Jesus and the bible in this instance.

I don't expect the Catholic church to support Gay Marriage. However, much like you don't support Shiria Law I'm sure to be put forth in America, I don't want Church Doctrine to be making up our laws either. There is a thing called "seperation of church and state" that was stressed by many of our Founding Fathers including Jefferson. America was the first Liberal state, based on the ideology of Liberalism which one of the foundations was religious tolerance.

The Church follows the teachings of Jesus. A damned sight more than our government do. If you are so keen on the separation of Church and State, then the States should not take any money from Churches. I have no problem with that. But States cannot take money from Churches and expect the Church to compromise its core values for the sake of political correctness.

 

[Si modo]

And, leave it to the source in the OP not to be thorough (and to the OP just to parrot without independent investigation); there is much more to this story.

Shelter Is Even More Tenuous
City Budget Cuts Stun Advocates for Homeless

By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 3, 2009

D.C. Council members and shelter providers were stunned to learn this week that the Fenty administration has cut $20 million from the city's homeless services budget for fiscal 2010. Advocates said the funding decrease likely will result in shelters being closed, forcing hundreds of adults and children onto the streets within months.

....

Cuts in D.C. Homeless Services Budget

Fenty couldn't be a shift manager at a fast food joint if his life depended on it.

 

[Intense]

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Can someone explain to me how the second sentence doesn't contradict the first?

it's a matter of public funding to a catholic suborganization that acts as the charity. No one expects catholics to let gays have weddings but they DO expect public money that funds a catholic charity to abide by the same employment requirements as anyone else.

Like I said... don't like the public standard then don't take the public money.

Yeah .... and We need more Conservatives working for The DNC Right. Maybe in Accounting???? You are really making sense.

 

[Modbert]

The Church follows the teachings of Jesus. A damned sight more than our government do. If you are so keen on the separation of Church and State, then the States should not take any money from Churches. I have no problem with that. But States cannot take money from Churches and expect the Church to compromise its core values for the sake of political correctness.

When the Church begins to say "we won't give you money for __" then they are discriminating and going against exactly what Christ said. Did you fail to read the verse I quoted earlier? Love thy enemy. Saying you wish to see your enemy killed or that they should be taken out of society because they are abominations against God is not loving thy enemy.

Legally, the Church can do whatever they want. I'm not disagreeing with that. Morally, what the church is doing however, is wrong.

Besides, one of the Church's core values is giving to others. Giving to others is mentioned a helluva lot more than the Gays in the Bible. So which takes precedence? The thing that was mentioned 2-3 times or the thing mentioned over a hundred times?

 

[Intense]

Excellent. Challenge my spelling... Nice. Congrats on that.

Fact is, the Catholic Church doesn't advocate stoning its flock, does it?

You're pissed because the Church doesn't do what you want it do to. Tough. If you're a Catholic, you should be used to having the Church do things that you disagree with. That's life in the Catholic faith.

They aren't gonna support Gay Marriage. End of Conversation. I don't know why the whining about stoning people or poor people suffering has become such an obsession with you but whatever.

I'm not pissed, I'm disappointed that the Church is not following the word of Jesus and the bible in this instance.

I don't expect the Catholic church to support Gay Marriage. However, much like you don't support Shiria Law I'm sure to be put forth in America, I don't want Church Doctrine to be making up our laws either. There is a thing called "seperation of church and state" that was stressed by many of our Founding Fathers including Jefferson. America was the first Liberal state, based on the ideology of Liberalism which one of the foundations was religious tolerance.

So stop doing damage to the Church and Respect It's Separation from The State.

 

[Intense]

The Church follows the teachings of Jesus. A damned sight more than our government do. If you are so keen on the separation of Church and State, then the States should not take any money from Churches. I have no problem with that. But States cannot take money from Churches and expect the Church to compromise its core values for the sake of political correctness.

When the Church begins to say "we won't give you money for __" then they are discriminating and going against exactly what Christ said. Did you fail to read the verse I quoted earlier? Love thy enemy. Saying you wish to see your enemy killed or that they should be taken out of society because they are abominations against God is not loving thy enemy.

Legally, the Church can do whatever they want. I'm not disagreeing with that. Morally, what the church is doing however, is wrong.

Besides, one of the Church's core values is giving to others. Giving to others is mentioned a helluva lot more than the Gays in the Bible. So which takes precedence? The thing that was mentioned 2-3 times or the thing mentioned over a hundred times?

Your argument is misconstrued. The Church Respects Gay's as Human Beings, The Church gives to the Poor. The Church maintains It's Integrity.

 

[JenyEliza]

WHY do people act surprised when the Roman Catholic Church .....

....FOLLOWS CATHOLIC DOCTRINE?

I don't get that.

Would we be surprised if Moslems acted Moslem????

Would we be surprised if Baptists acted Baptist?

Would we be surprised if Jews acted Jewish?

Would we be surprised if Buddhists acted Buddhist?

Would we be surprised if Seventh Day Adventists acted Seventh Day Adventist?

NO?

So why do people get their panties in a bunch and accuse the RCC of "issuing ultimatums" or "throwing their weight around" when the Church simply wants to uphold it's centuries old religious beliefs?

Why do some get their undies in a bunch because the RCC won't hire people who do not honor or recognize the RCC religious beliefs? WHY would such people *even want* to work for the RCC anyway?

Inquiring minds want to know.