New Law Would Force Churches to Accept Gay Marriage

A city council is weighing a proposed ordinance that would force churches in the Kansas town to rent their facilities for gay weddings.

This kind of thing nationwide is inevitable. Folks who are for gay marriage see it as a civil rights issue. And may see the Catholic Church and conservative Christian organizations as the enemy. Do you really think they'd fight for civil rights and then agree that the institutions they hate don't have to acknowledge those civil rights? Of course not. Like I said, this kind of law is inevitable everywhere.

Todd Starnes of Fox News reports:
The Hutchinson City Council will consider adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the protected classes in the city’s human relations code. They are expected to vote on the changes next month.

According to the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission, churches that rent out their buildings to the general public would not be allowed to discriminate “against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.”

Meryl Dye, a spokesperson for the Human Relations Commission confirmed to Fox News that churches would be subjected to portions of the proposed law.

“They would not be able to discriminate against gay and lesbian or transgender individuals,” Dye said. “That type of protection parallels to what you find in race discrimination. If a church provides lodging or rents a facility they could not discriminate based on race. It’s along that kind of thinking.”

Matthew Staver, chairman of the Liberty Counsel Action, told Fox News the proposed law is “un-American.”

“It is a collision course between religious freedom and the LGBT agenda,” Staver said. “This proposed legislation will ultimately override the religious freedom that is protected under the First Amendment.”

He argued that churches cannot be forced by the government to set aside their religious convictions and their mission. And, he warned, some churches could even be forced to rent their buildings for drag parties.
Hey, if religious institutions can be forced to cover abortifacients and sterilization procedures, what's the problem with forcing churches to rent their halls to folks celebrating a gay marriage. Come on, what's a little drag party between friends?

I'd suggest that churches start decorating their halls in very drab colors to avoid interest from gay marriage celebrations. And maybe put up lots of sports memorabilia. Wait, the lesbians might like that. How about a wall of inspirational posters with pictures of sunsets and lakes and stuff with quotes from Maggie Gallagher saying things like, "Europe, which gave us the idea of same-sex marriage, is a dying society, with birthrates 50 percent below replacement."

Comments

  1. A long time ago I heard an elderly couple on some Catholic radio call-in program asking what they should do because they wanted to open a bed and breakfast but did not want to let unmarried or gay couples stay there. The host said they probably could not legally limit guests to married couples, but that they could call the place something like "Our Lady of Sorrows Bed and Breakfast" to discourage anyone who didn't care for their values. Of course, a certain element would find that charmingly weird, kitschy, or a challenge. But I bet a church that took a similar approach would go a long way toward not attracting people who just want a "nice hall to rent." And I'm not just talking Catholics. Some strategically placed giant Thomas Kincaid murals would discourage a lot of secular couples.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If it is inevitable, that little thing of no consequence called the Constitution must be dealt with. Until then, any such law does not override the first ammendment but is in violation of it, and thus is illegal. Yes, laws can be illegal. As one of my favorite pundits once said (paraphrase): if the first ammendment fails to protect our rights, the second ammendment steps in.

    Zach

    ReplyDelete
  3. And the arguement shall continue...

    those who don't want to dispense birth control or abortion drugs, shouldn't be pharmacists. Those who don't want to perform abortions shouldn't go into nursing. Those who don't want to host/serve at same sex ceremonies shouldn't be in hospitality business, Catholics need to understand, we are not going to be able to dodge on our faith. We will have to stand, it will be hard, and the world will hate us.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The concept is appalling, yes, but, according to the article, the law would affect "churches that rent out their buildings to the general public." The answer there is, at least for the time being, pretty obvious: don't rent out your church facilities to the general public.
    R.E. what Gail Finke was saying above, I think it's probable that people seeking to advance their personal agendas would seek out just such B&Bs, etc., as in the case of Elane Photography in New Mexico.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you rent to the public or you take public funds, you have to serve ALL the public. If you don't rent your halls to non Catholics, you get non Catholic groups.

    If you get completely what you want, if a Black person came to your hospital, you could let them bleed if you were "Whites only". A gay car accident victim could also die since it is against your religion to condone it. Sadly, a pregnant woman will die before you would take the baby to save her life (Phoenix for example) killing both.

    Get rid of your public accomidations, huddle in your church, and you'll be free from us "others" you apparenly like to dislike.

    Rover.

    ReplyDelete
  6. More people need to understand that an inherently unjust "law" is not a law. It purports to be a law but it is invalid and void. All positive (man-made) law must as a matter of reason conform to the Divine or Natural Law, to natural justice. We are bound by the Natural Law to oppose any law that is in breach of natural justice. Everyone, particularly Catholics ought to understand this. Everyone used to. Before the totalitarian, positivist, atheistic, ideology pushed by socialists gained the upper hand in international legal instruments such as UN conventions, since the 1970s. This false, destructive ideology has pervaded many countries legal systems leading to the subversion of NL constitutions and a myriad of invalid laws (such as those permitting the killing of the unborn child, those interfering with marriage and the inalienable rights of the family, the proposed HHS mandate forcing people against their will to facilitate what is inherently wrong). As for the grossly untrue assertion that killing an unborn child does anything for his mother - this is a clearly irrational assertion, aimed at promoting the widespread killing of defenceless babies. Ireland has had the lowest maternal deaths of any country for 30 years (WH0) and maintains the ban on the intentional killing of unborn babies. Countries where abortion has been legal for a long time and where medical and nursing professions have been undermined by this repulsive, unjust practise, rates of maternal death are high. Where the life of the unborn baby is protected, there is better care, not just for the baby but also for his mother.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Gay-proof your halls with Pope wallpaper.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The crucial distinction that is lost on these secular lawmakers is that Catholics do not want to discriminate against gay people because of their orientation, but in certain cases because of their behavior. For example:

    Suppose that I am in charge of renting out the social hall at my local Catholic parish. A homosexually-oriented man comes to me and asks if he can rent the hall for a 50th wedding anniversary party for his parents. That's fine; I would rent the hall to him. In fact, it would be wrong for me to refuse to rent the hall to him just because he has a homosexual orientation (whether he acts on it or not), because his sexual preference and sexual behavior have absolutely nothing to do with his planned use of the hall.

    Now consider another example: The exact same homosexually-oriented man comes to me, and asks if he can rent the hall for a "wedding" reception, for him and his long-time male partner. In that case I would and should refuse to rent the hall to him, because the purpose for which he plans to use the hall goes against the teachings of the church that owns the hall.

    This is a bit easier for some people to understand if we put it in terms of religion. For example, it would be wrong for a Catholic parish to refuse to rent their social hall to a Baptist man who wants to rent it for a birthday party for his son. But it would be completely understandable if that same Catholic parish refused to rent the hall to the same man, if he planned to hold a Baptist revival meeting there. (And there's not even anything terribly wrong about a Baptist revival meeting; it just isn't compatible with the Catholic faith, so it would be strange to have it on the premises of a Catholic church.)

    In other words, it's all about what you plan to do with the rented hall, not who you are or what your orientation is. I can't understand why a large majority of the population seems unable to make this simple distinction.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If someone forces you to walk a mile - go two miles with him. Who cares about who rents a hall. Halls are not sacred spaces. They are revenue generators, so let the enemy give their money to the church. Smile on your way past the empty homo club to deposit your homo cash in the bank.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Most People are asleep, and don't know what's going on...try to tell them and they just stare, dumbfounded,as if you just made it up. Never checking up on it, doing some homework!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wouldn't they be required to go to 'pre-cana' classes and met the other requirements? Or, as a protected group, are they exempt there too, I wonder?

    Any priest who performs such a blasphemous fake marriage should be removed. And, of course, if they refuse, then the civil kgb will remove them--rock and hard place situation.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anon said: "If you get completely what you want, if a Black person came to your hospital, you could let them bleed if you were "Whites only".

    I reply: Uhh... can you cite a single incident from the height of segregation where a black man was denied emergency treatment by a whites only hosptial? For that matter, were there any white only hospitals (as opposed to segregation within the hospital which I'll grant)? Your logic is flawed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scott my grandfather died at home because black people were not allowed at the local hospital.

      Delete
  13. Around here Catholic churches do not allow their halls to be used for wedding receptions, period. It has to do with liability issues related to drinking and driving and fights breaking out. Do most churches in other parts of the US allow wedding receptions?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I don't understand WHY anyone would want to rent a hall from a group with highly divergent philosophies. There was (is?) a hall in my city with some 'Gaia' type word in its name. No, I wouldn't rent from them because I wouldn't want that title on my invitations. Similarly, if the NEA had a rental hall, I wouldn't host a homeschool conference there. Would Greenpeace want to rent space from a puppy mill? Would the NRA force the Quakers to let them use their meeting space?

    It just goes to show that NONE of this nonsense is about fairness for homosexuals. It's about a fundamentalist liberal agenda It's all about cramming their agenda down the throats of those who say that their behavior is unnatural. A Darwinist SHOULD say that, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like I said earlier, take their money and muffle you laughter on the way to the bank.

      Delete
  15. Lynda: This is a very good post. “All positive (man-made) law must as a matter of reason conform to the Divine or Natural Law, to natural justice. We are bound by the Natural Law to oppose any law that is in breach of natural justice. Everyone, particularly Catholics ought to understand this. Everyone used to. Before the totalitarian, positivist, atheistic, ideology pushed by socialists gained the upper hand in international legal instruments such as UN conventions, since the 1970s.” “The laws of nature and nature’s God” comes from The Declaration of Independence. If atheists want to subvert our founding principles they need to get two-thirds of the United States of America to ratify the change, not just standing there catterwailing “civil rights”. Civil rights are endowed by Our Creator-God. God creates and endows our sovereign personhood which becomes our citizenship. People come into existence through the will of God. Not one single person comes into existence without God. Without God, man is destined to go to hell. If Christians do not see an “alter Christi” in the other person because the other person has destroyed the image of God in himself, he is not to be trusted, not even to renting a room or a hall, but also to giving him credence. It is self-preservation, survival. There is self-defense in not trusting another individual because he does not trust in God.

    ReplyDelete
  16. > "Come on, what's a little drag party between friends? I'd suggest that churches start decorating their halls in very drab colors to avoid interest from gay marriage celebrations. And maybe put up lots of sports memorabilia. Wait, the lesbians might like that."

    It's anecdotal evidence, of course, but I'll point out that all of the men who I've known were gay enjoyed playing and watching sports.

    It really ruins Matt's point that he feels the need to tie it to overtly homophobic stereotyping. There's zero chance of anyone who isn't already convinced of the Church's position reading this post and concluding anything except: "this man hates LGBTQs and is using religion as an cover to continue bashing them".

    ReplyDelete
  17. Simple solution, don't rent out the hall to anyone for any reason. Let practicing Church members use the hall for receptions following sacramental marriages held in the church at no charge. Of course closing the halls off to gay receptions and gay groups meeting will probably ultimately close it off to other non-profit groups like AA. It probably is going to mean that church halls will be available for church related functions only. I wonder how our local UCC congregation would feel about renting their hall out to a meeting of Right to Life.

    ReplyDelete
  18. It really ruins Matt's point that he feels the need to tie it to overtly homophobic stereotyping.

    It think it is gratuitous stereotyping and I agree that Matt ought to stop doing it. I don't think it is homophobic--which is one of those words thrown about so carelessly that it has lost all meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  19. As a Catholic convert whose father was a Baptist minister, I don't quite understand why it is not more common to have a policy as follows: church meeting space facilities are available for rent (or at no charge) to couples who are being married in this church, and/or to members in good standing of this local congregation.

    Our little Catholic church does rent out its parish hall to non-parish members (it's a very small town), but has fairly strict guidelines as to how the hall is made available and to whom.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "....... if the first ammendment fails to protect our rights, the second ammendment steps in".

    Bingo.

    "Get rid of your public accomidations, huddle in your church, and you'll be free from us "others" you apparenly like to dislike."

    See above.

    Ignore the law.

    Refuse to obey.

    Sue.

    Simply refuse.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The homosexuals will not quit until we surrender our faith. Eventually they will kill those who oppose them. It has happened before.

    ReplyDelete
  22. When they say "facilities" do they mean church basements for reception or churches for marriages..the latter would just never work..in order to be married in a Catholic church, one needs to undergo months of preparation, take classes, etc. And sorry to say, there is not "valid matter" here (i.e., man and woman) so it's not even a real marriage. Who would go have a reception at a church they weren't even married in? Unless someone is deliberately stirring up trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The problem is that gay relationships are being made legal. If it was illegal, there would be no problem. Example-would you book a hotel room if there was a possibility the person would be using illegal drugs such as cocaine or smoke a joint or consuming vast amounts of alcohol, then driving in the wee hours of the morning intoxicated? Would you own a bed and breakfast if the same sex couple were going to have sex or a man and woman having sex outside of marriage?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Hey, Rover, I think on some level even you are vaguely aware—if we can call your dim flickers of cognition "awareness"—that you're attacking a strawman.

    But then again, I'm not sure you can actually tell a strawman from a person. I'm sure the differences seem vague and indistinct to (what we flatter lavishly by calling) your mind.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Get rid of your public accomidations, huddle in your church, and you'll be free from us 'others' you apparenly like to dislike."

    First, learn how to spell "accommodations." Second, disagreeing with someone does not mean disliking them. Third, you're an idiot.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment