Groups Want Faith Exemption On Same-Sex Marriage Issue

Freedom to practice my religion is once again being threatened by CT lawmakers. When I look at a river, I know what I am looking at; it is flowing water. This is true, even if someone wants to call it a peach pit. It is the same with marriage definitions.

Permission to Discriminate? To ignore another's fundamental rights? When a bus company insists someone ride in the back of the bus, or stay out of their diner, what do we call that? A Violation of Civil Rights. Just as in CA, the devout are whipped into a frenzy and are demanding their religion become law. Sounds more like the Taliban every day.

The recogntion of the rights for two same sex people is recognizing the dignity of all human beings. All human beings deserve certain fair treatment--those rights fought for in the civil rights movement and in the immigration movement. But neither of these movements, nor respect for the Jewish, Muslim, or other faiths ever said that their way of life had to be taught as the normal way. The current bill is taking a life style--no different from any religion-- and trying to force it on all people. This is communisim with a new spin!

Catholic church should spend money on feeding the hungry and clothing the naked, not HATE. First they protect pedophiles, now they are spreading hate, and they wonder why we have stopped attending church.

When are these religious types going to get their noses out of other people's business with their cheap tactics.-- Oh, when we all begin to forget their sponsorship of their child molesting "priests". Hartford needs to stop pandering to these extremists and respond to the budget income shortfall by making needed cuts.

What ever happened to "Turn the other cheek?" It is time for the church to join the real world and get on with life. I really do not have any angst with gay marriages one way or the other, but since these marriages are legal then the RC church should also recognize the legality and do whatever they may be askked to do.

There is no such thing as a civil right to engage in illegal discrimination. If you hold yourself out to the public to provide a product or services, you can't offer to some and withhold from others.

We've already had to fight this battle in the U.S. It was called Jim Crow and it gave business owners the "freedom" to refuse to serve blacks. It was called "we need a man for this job honey" and it gave employers the "freedom" to refuse to hire women. Those who advocated discrimination always portrayed it as an infringement on their rights. But it's real simple. If you can't abide by the law, then don't be in this business.

On all issues that are genuinely about religion - who can belong to your church, who is qualified to serve as a religious official, what you can say from the pulpit, how you conduct your religious ceremonies - including weddings - the First Amendment continues to provide full protection. But being in business selling a product or a service is not a function of religion.

It's about time that people representing the mainstream stood up and said NO! "The inmates have been running the asylum"! THat must end.

An extension of the logic behind this initiative is exactly the same as that used to justify the catholic church's attempts to obtain faith-based exemptions for its medical personnel and hospitals. Should this piece of legislative bias pass into law, we will most certainly see it used as leverage to revisit the medical services discrimination fight. It's all about the money. The catholic church still wants public funds for providing medical services, but only according to its dogmatic bias.

It would do everyone well to remember that the organization and its followers who are pushing for yet another type of discrimination 'because it is right' are the same group that used to burn people at the stake as heretics for saying the earth revolved around the sun. catholic doctrine held that the opposite was true so anyone who believed in scientific fact instead of 'church teachings' was under the 'influence of the devil' and murdered by thugs operating under religious protection.

Given the hard economic times, and the continued separation of church and state blurring, maybe it is time to revisit eliminating the tax exempt status for religious organizations.

E Johnson wrote:

It's about time that people representing the mainstream stood up and said NO! "The inmates have been running the asylum"! THat must end.

..that would be the same 'mainstream' that provided us with the oxymoronic 'moral majority'? The only asylum inmates in this fight are the ones who appointed a Nazi youth alumni as their human rights advocate.

In today's political climate, you are considered a right wing extremist if you oppose such things as homosexuality being crammed down your throat and your children at school,also. Homosexuality, socialism, and atheism now hold sway. Even the write of this aritcle is obviously in agreeement in this same direction. Nobody is calling her a left wing extremist. Her group is now in charge!

Bob wrote:

Freedom to practice my religion is once again being threatened by CT lawmakers. When I look at a river, I know what I am looking at; it is flowing water. This is true, even if someone wants to call it a peach pit. It is the same with marriage definitions.

I agree.

This is incredibly misleading article.

Andrew McDonald (D-Stamford), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, authored SB899 which takes away the First Amendment rights of the church and other organizations in regard to speaking out about homosexuality.

Some of the other organizations that would be impacted include the Boy Scouts.

If homosexuality was genetic, SB899 might have some merit. However, since homosexuality is not genetic, this legislation is strictly about taking First Amendment rights away from a particular group.

http://www.cwfa.org/images/content/bornorbred...

It seems to me, that Senator McDonald (and Representative Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) are one issue state representatives. They were behind the previous legislation forcing lay people to take control of the Roman Catholic Church's finances in Connecticut. As co-heads of the Judiciary, they are indirectly responsible for the Petit murders as they repeatedly side with felons in terms of punishment.

These two individuals (and the entire GA) should strictly on solving Connecticut's budgetary issues and stop trying to find ways, through legislation, to justify their alternative lifestyles.

This is my opinion as a gay person. Give them the exemptions. Do not Fine public officials However require that at least 1 who is willing to deal with us on staff. Public places and buisiness cannot discriminate that is the law. Churches should be allowed to refuse gay marriages if its against their beliefs.

If the story about the NJ church is going to continue as an example - then the entire story needs to be told -- as long as they were receiving government money they were required to be open to all citizens. The same outcome would have happened had they turned away any couple based on their beliefs (black, asian, indian, jewish, disabled, etc)

What's next?
A nurse/doctor who is a Jehovnah witness refuses to treat a transplant patient because their religion doesn't believe in transplants?
A jewish firefighter won't go the fire at a christian church?
An ER doc won't treat an AIDS patient?
What about the gay people who have deep religious beliefs who are forced into "domestic partnerships" that require co-habitation prior to the state recognizing their relationship, which is what CA does.
Are there any cases of non-Catholics suing the Catholic church because they refused to marry them?
Are there any lawsuits against the Catholic church because they refuse to accept a civil divorce without the expense of a church annulment?
Do Catholics not become fertility doctors because the church doesn't believe in fertility treaments?
Are fertility specialist turning away Catholic patients because it's against the Catholic church beliefs?
There are over 40,000 religions in the United States -- where does it stop once it's starts?

Is that last quote supposed to be attributed to someone, or is it an editorial comment?

VtSon wrote:

What ever happened to "Turn the other cheek?" It is time for the church to join the real world and get on with life. I really do not have any angst with gay marriages one way or the other, but since these marriages are legal then the RC church should also recognize the legality and do whatever they may be askked to do.

Using your logic, the Roman Catholic Church should also favor abortion and ignore hundreds of years of Church doctrine and teachings.

What happened to standing up for what is right?

Is courage now being replaced by GroupThink?

It wasn't long ago the Catholic Church was figting against signs that ready "No Irish Need Apply" and now they are the ones pushing for state sanctioned discrimination. There are many gay Catholics and gay people who are loved by Catholics and in the end love will prevaile. Hate is not a pretty thing in any group.

Inquisition always wrote:

When are these religious types going to get their noses out of other people's business with their cheap tactics.-- Oh, when we all begin to forget their sponsorship of their child molesting "priests". Hartford needs to stop pandering to these extremists and respond to the budget income shortfall by making needed cuts.

My church allows gay marriage and welcomes gay people as members. Why does the Catholic Church feel it speaks for all Christians? I am totally against state sanctioned discrimination for any purpose. The greatest commandment is to love everyone, even the sinner. Have we forgotten what Christianity is all about?

The bible bigots have no shame do they? What worthless anti-American pieces of trash these people are. How is the religious freedom of a wedding photographer threatened by shooting a gay wedding? These bible perverts act as if they are being forced to engage in gay sex! CT needs to step on these losers and tell them enough is enough of this bs. Let the catholic church discriminate it wants, who cares, they are a dying institution anyway because of their narrow minded intolerance on issues like this.
The gay marriage issue has been wonderful for exposing what losers these catholics are and now a lot of people are ashamed to even admit they are catholic. It's like claiming to be a dunce.

Two Good Hands wrote:

There is no such thing as a civil right to engage in illegal discrimination. If you hold yourself out to the public to provide a product or services, you can't offer to some and withhold from others.
We've already had to fight this battle in the U.S. It was called Jim Crow and it gave business owners the "freedom" to refuse to serve blacks. It was called "we need a man for this job honey" and it gave employers the "freedom" to refuse to hire women. Those who advocated discrimination always portrayed it as an infringement on their rights. But it's real simple. If you can't abide by the law, then don't be in this business.
On all issues that are genuinely about religion - who can belong to your church, who is qualified to serve as a religious official, what you can say from the pulpit, how you conduct your religious ceremonies - including weddings - the First Amendment continues to provide full protection. But being in business selling a product or a service is not a function of religion.

This is the most intelligent post I have read in ages.