Should church be able to opt out of gay rights laws?

Question

Catholic leaders in the UK say their adoption agencies will not place children with homosexual couples in defiance of new anti-discrimination laws.

They have threatened to close the agencies down and have been backed by the Church of England, which agrees that Christians should be exempt from rules which they say go against the teachings of the bible.

Should faith organisations be exempt from gay rights legislation?

Is the Catholic church guilty of blackmail in threatening to close its adoption agencies?

How important are matters of conscience?

Answer 1

Catholics may think they are being discriminated against, however religion is a belief and a choice.

Contrary to popular belief, sexuality is not a choice and that is why I consider the discrimination against gay people worse. You can't change who you are and you shouldn't have to.

The church is wrong on this one. If we allow it exemption from this law what other laws are at risk and from which religions?

So, the church is saying if they can't place children where they like, they won't provide loving homes for any children!

Sounds to me like their own petty prejudices are more important than the long-term welfare of the children.

Sad.

Answer 2

I think you have expressed it the wrong way round. Should the Government enact legislation to force the Catholic Church, under threat of arrest or closure of its agencies, to go against its doctrinal beliefs dating back centuries. It is the Government, using 'gay rights' as an excuse, that is being intolerant, particularly when it could allow the Catholic adoption agencies to carry on their sterling work without impacting the rest of society. It is particularly ironic, when it is being done in the name of homosexuals, who were themselves, until recently, a persecuted minority. You would think that they, above all, would not want to be seen as intolerant toward the Catholic Church. Remember, the Church is not telling other agencies not to allow gay couples to adopt, quite the opposite, they are advising where they can go to get this service. No, it is the left wing Government that hates religion, because it is seen as a threat to their agenda.

I have to say, that the way you have framed your question, suggests that you are in favour of the legislation, and that the church should be forced to operate against its beliefs. The Government has no business legislating on matters of conscience. That is the problem. The COE, to its eternal shame, had already backed down on this and other issues. This is because it has already been taken over by the PC/lefty/feminist brigade, and, in my view, can no longer be taken seriously as a religious institution.

Answer 3

Some would say that the church answers to a higher law, the laws of their faith and doctrine. Using that logic, they should be exempt from gay rights legislation, as it would be requiring them to go against their beliefs.

However there are times in history times when the church has had to bow down to the law of the land by force, or face the consequence of breaking the law.

Example, when the Church of Latter Day Saints "Mormons" were made to stop plural marriage and abide by the law of government, not of their prophet.

For the Catholic church to take this stance is in my opinion hypocritical. They have hardly been a moral compass or authority in regards to what is best for a child's welfare. Indeed it would appear they have done more over the years to protect the clergy of their faith who have sexually abused children, then to protect children of such abuse.

Based on that, they lose their argument I'm afraid.

Perhaps they need to get out of the business of adoption and concentrate more on fixing the problems they have within their own organisation.

Answer 4

Although a lot of Americans are beginning to come around to the gay acceptance issue's, I am still clear of not accommodating any part of my religion, to benefit any one particular set of people. Given any due that some may disagree the fact remains the same, those of faith, will not add or take away anything in the Word of God. We accept anyone as a person, and condemn the sin's, but no-one should attempt to break the sanctuary beliefs of any church or religion. That is why the church and state are separate, to protect what the religion holds truth to, regardless of anyones dispute to the church. It is all defined by God's word, teachings, and laws set out for each of the faithful, and moreso the Leadership of the flock.

Answer 5

While I do not agree with the churches' positions, it is not blackmail, nor is it illegal in another manner. There is no legal requirement that those churches provide adoption services. If they wish not to take part in the government's requirements, then they may simply stop providing those services. That is traditionally how churches, and other non-profit organizations react to changes int he law to which they do not agree.

BTW, matters of the conscious are of the utmost importance. Such things are what makes us who we are. When non-profit organizations, including churches, feel the heat from their members about how the organization has let them down and how those members will leave if changes are not made, then the organization will make changes.

Answer 6

'faith organisations' are not above the law in gay rights legislation or any other. Law is set by and depends on precedent. We would logically then have valid claims from Jewish, Hindu and Muslim people claiming exemption from the law to justify their pratices. The legitimate remedies are to seek to change the law by accepted democratic means or to break the law and accept the consequences.
Would it were possible in this instance to ask for the informed consent of the adoptee, then there would be no problem

Answer 7

I don't think Churches should be allowed to be involved in any child services. Would be a good thing if they closed ALL their adoption agencies.

As Prof Richard Dawkins says, there is no such thing as 'Christian' children. Only children with Christian parents/guardians. Indoctrinating children into organised religion is child abuse.

This whole issue shows the Churches for what they are. Despicable, nasty minded people who believe more in 2000 year old fairy tales, then modern human rights.

Answer 8

No they ought to not. ought to a cult be allowed to wave the banning of slavery and keep human beings in chains to do their bidding merely because they seem a "church"? How about if the Satanic church tried to repeal animal cruelty regulations so as that they could sacrifice goats the way they wanted? non secular agencies in the adventure that they want to operate in a rustic ought to appreciate its regulations. And those regulations about human rights were exceeded into regulation, they are as binding as regulations to dodge criminal acts. in the adventure that they "settle on" out, they are committing against the law.

Answer 9

If the church can opt out of discrimination laws, then so can nazi groups. You see how the church is the one putting in the 'thin end of the wedge,' not the people who just want to raise a child.

Anyway, the chuch gets away with too much already by being able to opt out of reality.

Answer 10

If the church want to obey God word the Bible then yes for in his word it a no no but since they want to keep there jobs and a comfortable way of living no as with all men and woman now if you stand up for the word of God and Jesus Christ the world will hate you and those in authority who stole there jobs in the first place will and can take away jobs houses and a comfortable living from any who disagree with them or are not PC. they will be called trouble makers just like Jesus was he said it would be so and it is.