Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Catholic Church Threatens to Stop Taking DC's Money if Officials Don't Bow to its Demands on Same-Sex Marriage

Posted by Melissa McEwan, Shakesville at 5:44 PM on November 12, 2009.


Quite the threat.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Rights and Liberties in your
mailbox!

 

God is love, bitchez:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care. 

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.

Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.

"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

Just so we're all on the same page, the Catholic Church doesn't want to extend partner benefits to same-sex married couples, because they view homosexuality as a sin. The Catholic Church also believes that all of its employees are sinners, by virtue of its doctrine viewing all humans as sinners. But they're not arguing that they shouldn't be compelled to extend benefits to those sinners, nor would they argue that providing healthcare coverage to people whose bad health habits they regard as sinful (gluttony! sloth! lust!) is a tacit endorsement of those sins. It's a special argument reserved especially just for the very special case of gay people and their specialized sin.

Catholic Charities, the church's social services arm, is one of dozens of nonprofit organizations that partner with the District. It serves 68,000 people in the city, including the one-third of Washington's homeless people who go to city-owned shelters managed by the church. City leaders said the church is not the dominant provider of any particular social service, but the church pointed out that it supplements funding for city programs with $10 million from its own coffers.

"All of those services will be adversely impacted if the exemption language remains so narrow," Jane G. Belford, chancellor of the Washington Archdiocese, wrote to the council this week.

Ah, it reminds me of those lovely words spoken by the Savior during his Sermon on the Mount: "And lo I beseech you to fuck over the homeless if the gays get too uppity."

Councilperson David Catania, who sponsored DC's same-sex marriage bill and chairs the Health Committee, sniffed at the church's threat: "They don't represent, in my mind, an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure." Councilperson Mary Cheh was even less generous, saying the church's behavior was "somewhat childish."

Digg!

Tagged as: catholic church, marriage equality

Melissa McEwan writes and edits the blog Shakespeare's Sister.


What Sarah Palin's "Jewish people will be flocking to Israel" prediction means
Palin's associated with a religious tendency whose leaders promote anti-Jewish conspiracy theory
Post by Bruce Wilson. November 21, 2009.
Considering a Faux Turkey for the Holidays? Better Read This First
A review of four "birds" -- and it's not pretty.
Post by Tara Lohan. November 21, 2009.
Tea-Parties so Diverse, They Had to Use the Same Black Guy in 5 Different Scenes of Tea-Bagger Movie
Really, you know a black tea-bagger named Nate?
Post by Oliver Willis. November 20, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
Good to know that Xtian community service is conditional
Posted by: zola77 on Nov 12, 2009 6:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dont take the money!

Allow it to be redistributed to non-religious groups who provide the same services and dont put conditions on their "service to the community".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How does the Catholic Church define "service"?
Posted by: GuitarBill on Nov 12, 2009 6:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That which a bull does to a cow.

The federal government has no business funding any "Catholic charity".

"...Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

-- Thomas Jefferson, slave-holder, wealthy elite, "founding father", and "lover" of slaves. From Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 1 January 1802.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not morality, it's economics.
Posted by: conuly on Nov 12, 2009 7:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just so we're all on the same page, the Catholic Church doesn't want to extend partner benefits to same-sex married couples, because they view homosexuality as a sin.

They don't want to extend these partner benefits because they're cheap. They just use prejudice and "morals" as their excuse. May even believe that's their real reasoning. But it's not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oh, please!
Posted by: kcdrew on Nov 12, 2009 7:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, hell, let's take 'em up on it! Screw 'em! Cut 'em off now! No more money--of any kind--to the Catholic Church! While we're at it, let's cut every other religion off the government money-teat. Fuck 'em. Let's make the Catholics have to sell that fuckin' Vatican, while we're at it! They could feed, clothe, nurse and medicate a helluva lotta people, worldwide, if they'd sell that big sonuvabitch.

Fuck 'em. Cut 'em off now! Let's get real.

Mo Rage
The blog

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WELL BOO-HOO-HOO AMEN.
Posted by: Longdream on Nov 12, 2009 7:51 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are so many social service agencies who have lost their contracts or a substantial amount of funding in the past year that it wouldn't take a New York week to replace these bigots. Yes, bigots is exactly what they are.

By the way, under the rules of the so-called faith-based initiative, when a religious organization takes public funds to administer services, those services MUST be administered to the targeted recipients without constraint or regard for religious affiliation or concerns. That's written down in lots of important places, like federal law, state statutes and their CONTRACTS.

Catholic Charities has been one of the largest service providers in a number of states for decades, and there was never any of this religionist posturing until now. We don't have to think for long to figure out why. It's that brand new party under the Sign of the Swine. The OinkOink Party. The Savin' Our Own Bacon Party. The Party of Sooooooooo-Weeeeeeeeeee Come to the Trough!

God damned right wing assholes on both sides of the aisle come together under the sign of the pork to take down a nation near and dear to you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tax the church like any other service industry.
Posted by: pelican beak on Nov 12, 2009 10:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Give that revenue to secular groups for social service work.

I stay away from churches
to avoid the poor character-quality hypocrites
they attract.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being Holy...or being holey
Posted by: suncadetamber on Nov 12, 2009 10:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Childish?

Yes. I agree. It seems like a matter of, 'You can't have what you want unless I get what I want.'

And in a religious sense:

If you can help tens of thousands of people, don't you ask 'What would Jesus Do?'

To deny needy people? Not really Christ-like if you ask me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: nike dunk. You've been reported asshole. n/t
Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale on Nov 13, 2009 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
n/t

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Services to the Community by Religious Organisations
Posted by: moloko velocet on Nov 13, 2009 3:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...should be made an absolute, perpetual condition of acquiring and maintaining their tax-free status.

Every one of these multi-billion dollar "industries", regardless of whether mainstream or fringe, should be required by law to provide economic support for their parisioners (or congregants), as well as for the secular communities at large.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's okay to have same sex intercourse..
Posted by: zipper696 on Nov 13, 2009 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...as long as the priest doesn't want to marry his choir boy.

Cut the funding - there are plenty of other agencies that will happily use the funds without restrictions to help the needy.

Let the Catholic Church become even more irrelevant than they are already.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Call it what it is.
Posted by: warrior woman on Nov 13, 2009 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Blackmail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evil Bigots
Posted by: QQOblivion on Nov 13, 2009 8:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do Catholics realize that their cult is run by EVIL bigots!?

Who would Jesus blackmail??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: vil Bigots Posted by: TheExpatriate
End the TAX exemptions for ALL religions!
Posted by: weslen1 on Nov 13, 2009 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By exempting Churches and other "religious" institutions from the taxes the rest of us have to pay, WE the PEOPLE, whether we belong to one of those religions, especially the Catholic church, are subsidizing narcissistic church "leaders" to buy their mansions, yachts, mink coats and fill their bank accounts with millions that should go to more important things. We are SUBSIDIZING PEDOPHILE PRIESTS and paying for BILLIONS of dollars worth of "treasures" the Catholic Church hoards, in GOLD and ART of all kinds.
End the tax exemption to the Catholic Church ALONE and that would put 10 or 20 TIMES what they spend on "charities", which are ONLY used as a means to force non-believers to TOW THE CHURCH LINE, into ending 90 percent of poverty.
Call it "FAITH BASED COMMON SENSE".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

makaainana
Posted by: Makaainana on Nov 13, 2009 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cannot another charity do the same job?

I wonder what Christ would do? Does that seem a guiding principle?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Found! The famous "lost chapters" from the Gospel of St. Matthew!
Posted by: eddie torres on Nov 13, 2009 11:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Ah, it reminds me of those lovely words spoken by the Savior during his Sermon on the Mount: 'And lo I beseech you to fuck over the homeless if the gays get too uppity'."

Thank you Melissa McEwan for uncovering these lost biblical treasures. They must have secretly hidden them in the "Epistle to (Christopher) Titus" or something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

wow
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford on Nov 13, 2009 6:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And lo I beseech you to fuck over the homeless if the gays get too uppity."
Yep, it's in there, look it up.
Jesus was a regular homophobe.
Hung out with dudes all the time.
Women adored him for his sexy little beard.



I'm sorry... let me get this whole thing straight...

You're going to chuck out the homeless because the city of D.C. is going to recognize gay marriage? i.e. something that doesn't affect you at all?

Wow.

You should really rethink what you're doing. Church and state are separate entities. No society lasts long when religious nutjobs control its laws.

I used to be Catholic. As Catholic as one can get. I'm talking ready to enter the seminary. I knew the doctrines forwards and back.

But now, as an outsider looking in on what I used to subscribe to, I can safely say that I feel sick that I was ever a part of such an organization.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ignorance/Arrogance Exempt should also mean tax-exempt...
Posted by: Dak on Nov 14, 2009 1:46 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been pro-church tax minded for about 9 years. Nothing is more disgusting than arrogant Christianity.
If the Catholic church had any morals whatsoever, they never would have taken state or Federal money in the first place! Now they have the opportunity to cut all services and renounce the money. 10-1 they won't do it.
Hypocrites!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]