• Who we are
  • Archives
  • Categories
  • That measures up

    2012 - 06.03

    For the past few weeks I’ve been looking for examples of religious liberties being trampled as the reason we need to pass measure three. Today’s Forum contained a letter that finally had an example:

    Examples of recent state and federal government initiatives against religious institutions include Catholic Charities having to shut down their adoption services in Massachusetts and Illinois because of the states’ refusal to allow them to opt-out of placing children in homes with same- sex couples or unmarried, heterosexual couples.

    So if I understand this correctly, Catholic charities have chosen to altogether STOP assisting unwanted children in finding homes; rather than being ‘forced’ to place children with the most qualified parents, if those parents who desperately want to give a home and a life to a child happen to be of the same gender or unmarried.

    It appears they think it is better for the child to be raised in an institution or a series of foster homes rather than with loving parents. (?)

    Okay. That’s Christ-like.

    Here’s the irony: measure three will actually make it easier for guys like me to sue Catholic Charities who refuse to place children with qualified parents because measure three places the burden on the state to prove why upholding a specific religious practice harms the greater good of society.

    Refusing to place children in homes of loving parents and insisting they remain a financial burden to society would be a perfect example of their religious practice harming society at large.

    Today’s Gay Agenda: Remember when your mom said “be careful what you wish for!”

    Tags: , , , , ,

    10 Responses to “That measures up”

    1. wj says:

      What ever your views on the measure, you clearly don’t understand how it would work.

      Right now, the state would have no burden of proof. After Measure 3 it would have some. If, of course, your challenge would be that the law infringes upon your religious belief. But that is not what you are alleging.

    2. Avatar of Mac Mac says:

      Ah, but that’s the beauty of measure three. MY religion requires that organizations that provide adoption services do not discriminate against unmarried or same gender couples. Under measure three, I can sue to ensure my religious belief that all children deserve loving homes is being infringed upon by Catholic Charities and their belief harms me, my faith and dozens of children.

      Read the verbiage of the measure. It is so broad and so vague that it appears anyone can hang up a sign, call themselves a ‘church’ and force all kinds of laws to go away as well as force religions to stop discriminating against people they don’t like.

      My religion also requires that couples that live together get married. Just think how much fun it will be to watch the state of ND prove why selling marriage licenses to two men harms society at large. :)

      • Avatar of maverick says:

        I plan on starting a new Psychedelic Venus Church here in North Dakota. I plan on having open air meetings just like the Lutherans do on Sundays.. I was thinking that right in front of the 10 commandments monument out side city hall would be a great place for the service.

        Their belief ritual starts out with some comely young lady offering herself up as the main attraction while members of the church engage in oral activities surrounding her ahem.. private areas.. Once everyone has gotten ample opportunity to pay homage to the goddess Venus, the group activities start in full ‘swing’.

        Looking for some new members if this law passes…

    3. Stephan says:

      It seems that some translate “religious liberty” as, “let me do what I want, let me ignore laws that I don’t like, and by the way, don’t forget to send that federal grant money”.

      Religious liberty is being used to justify so much bad behavior that it is not funny.

    4. Ta2tesla says:

      Stephan hasn’s mankind hid behind “religious Liberty” for hundreds of years? With the freedom of religion we can do what ever we want and just say our imaginary friend in the sky told us to.

      I find it more than slightly ironic than the people that claim to be followers of the prophet Christ never seem to understand his basic teachings and lessons he tried to bestow on them. Things like love your neighbor unconditionally, help each other out, treat each other the way you want to be treated. They tend to ignore the apects of his teachings that dont quite fit into their own personal beliefs. Like tellling people that are in love and want to spend their lives taking care of each other they cant because it says so in the bible. Which it doesnt.

      The only difference from gays being allowed to get married or adopt children and heterosexuals being allowed to is…nothing. This country went through a similar cultural shift in the 1960′s with blacks and people of mixed races being allowed to marry. My wife (she is Koren born, american raised) would not have been allowed to even date back then because society couldnt wrap their heads around the idea. And now 40 odd years later no one cares. The same will happen for the gay community. Let them adopt, whom is it harming?

    5. Scott says:

      So basically you’re saying that while you hate having the anti-gay folks cram their agenda down your throat, you feel it is alright to cram your agenda down the Catholic church’s throat.

      I shouldn’t argue here, as it probably is not welcome. But I guess I found my answer to how I should vote. It isn’t enough to work toward political and social equality, but you are working to disallow people to worship as they choose.

      • Stephan says:

        In the United States, we live under The Constitution, not religious dogma.
        It is my belief that civil marriage is protected under the equal protection clause of our Constitution.
        I am not a gay person, so my interest in marriage equality is just that…in the United States, everyone deserves equal protection and equality when it comes to civil rights, and that includes the right to marry.
        No one is forcing any church to have gay marriages…that is why we have the separation of church and state. But I do not think any church has the right to define civil marriage
        just because it violates their ideology.

      • Lukas says:

        Not exactly, it’s more the other way around 2500 years of religious oppression has made it so it seems as if the GLBT community has something to do with infringing your right to practice free religion. This is not the case, has never been the case, and is very convoluted in it’s integrity. Most homosexual people have been cast out from ANY church that your statement is farcical on it’s face.

        Homosexual people have risen the fact that marriage is not a religious concept, yet it is a legal one. Not a church matter but a matter for the state so the equality of all people can be assured. You don’t seem to take into account that every religion has it’s own agenda besides it’s stated theological goal, and that is what we are seeing here. It’s interesting to note that no one is making a fuss about this besides secular Christians whom also are politically inclined.

        I have yet to hear from a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Native American on the matter. All I ever seem to hear are the lies and fear-mongering of old fat well to do White men, falsely pious Bishops and Priests, and ignorant Women whom just need something to squak about so the boys will still listen to them as they try to break that glass ceiling.

        As much as the Church wants this to be about them and theirs, this is about freedom for all people. Even those that do not agree with the Church. If you recall, we do live in a country founded on religious freedom — including the freedom to not have one — yet here we are 230 some years later having the same discussion. The only difference is it’s not about the Quakers, it’s about the Homosexuals. So what? Stay out of other peoples lives and stop trying to control them via the Torah. Your not Jewish are you? Well stop referring to the Old Testament then to make you moral decisions. Because that’s what the Old Testament is. If any of these so called Christians were not as ignorant to their Holy book as they are Fox News, they might know that the Christian holy book is the New Testament.

        In fact, if I recall 3rd grade Sunday School correctly, God sent his only Son to forgive us, to wash us clean of the Old Testament. That was the entire point of JESUS CHRIST. That a NEW TESTAMENT be given and that the OLD ONE BE THROWN OUT.

        So unless you are God, and I don’t mean some Bishop or the Pope, you have no right, place, or authority to judge others based on what you feel is moral or not.

        • Stephan says:

          Lukas, your post is a very good reason why we need the separation of church and state. Frankly, I didn’t understand most of what you said, but your last line that “unless you are under God…you have no place to judge… what is moral or not”
          is just another another way of saying, “I’m right and you are wrong”. Our moral compass as Americans is The Constitution. That way all are treated equally.

      • Avatar of Mac Mac says:

        Not at all. I AM forcing them to stop expecting me and all of society to live by THEIR religious doctrine. I truly don’t care if they snake dance. It’s when they expect me to join in their snake dance or pay for their care and feeding of their snakes where I object.

        When we decide laws should be based on the most popular religion of the day, we need to be prepared to figure out how to un-do those laws when those zany, fun loving, devil-may-care Muslims become the majority. They’re as obsessed with virginity as conservatives here are with gay sex and the people who have it. And we thought the republicans were trying to oppress women.

        Granted, the US would be better if I could force the gay agenda on all men. Can you imagine a country FILLED with men with great haircuts, bleached teeth, buffed nails, waists no less than six inches smaller than their chests, and who would rather cut off their feet than appear in public in sox and sandals?


        Oh, for the record, people generally giggle like school kids when anyone uses the phrase ‘ram down your throat’ in reference to gay topics. (think about it) :)

    Your Reply