Faith groups increasingly lose gay rights fights. (It's about time.)

[Lil Missy]

'It really is all about religious liberty for us,' says leader of Methodist group

Faith organizations and individuals who view homosexuality as sinful and refuse to provide services to gay people are losing a growing number of legal battles that they say are costing them their religious freedom.

The lawsuits have resulted from states and communities that have banned discrimination based on sexual orientation. Those laws have created a clash between the right to be free from discrimination and the right to freedom of religion, religious groups said, with faith losing. They point to what they say are ominous recent examples:

A Christian photographer was forced by the New Mexico Civil Rights Commission to pay $6,637 in attorney's costs after she refused to photograph a gay couple's commitment ceremony.
A psychologist in Georgia was fired after she declined for religious reasons to counsel a lesbian about her relationship.

Christian fertility doctors in California who refused to artificially inseminate a lesbian patient were barred by the state Supreme Court from invoking their religious beliefs in refusing treatment.

A Christian student group was not recognized at a University of California law school because it denies membership to anyone practicing sex outside of traditional marriage.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30146878/

[RetiredTrotskyite]

1. K&R n/t

[juno jones]

2. To the greatest...k&r

[Runcible Spoon]

3. I won't be happy until the bigots are left penniless and alone.

:grr:

[rbixby]

4. I just wonder

Is it really right to force this stuff on people? Isn't it being a bit disrespectful to their religion to force them to do things their faith tells them not to? I'm not in any way endorsing discrimination, but in the same respect, isn't this doing the same sort of thing that they've been doing to homosexuals? I'm a bit conflicted about it. I just think that people are well within their rights to not want to be exposed to things they disagree with. Its like saying "a vegetarian was forced to eat 3 pounds of undercooked beef today, despite her well known opposition to eating mean".
I think that to a certain extent, people should be allowed to practice their religious beliefs, and most of Christianity believes that homosexuality is wrong. I think that if we're going to work towards equality, we shouldn't do it by pushing beliefs down other people's throats.

[BattyDem]

8. But where do we draw the line?

As I said in my post below ...

Once we allow religion to be an excuse to discriminate against one group of people, it can be used to discriminate against ANY group of people and civil rights laws will no longer mean a damn thing.

Why should Christians be given a free pass on civil rights laws? Will we be making exceptions to other laws as well? Will other religions also be given exceptions to laws that violate their beliefs ... or is it just Christians that "deserve" an exemption from our country's laws?

Laws only mean something when they are applied to everyone equally. I know that doesn't always happen, but once we start down the road of allowing "this group to ignore the law for this reason" or "that group to ignore the law for that reason", then no person in this country will ever be protected by the law.

Welcome to DU. :hi:

[BattyDem]

11. Forgot to mention ...

You compared a vegetarian forced to eat meat to a Christian not being allowed to discriminate, but it's not the same thing. The vegetarian is not trying to force other people to stop eating meat, nor is he trying to discriminate against meat eaters. Forcing a vegetarian to eat meat would be like forcing a Christian to participate in homosexuality, which no one is trying to do.

The great thing about a democracy is that you can live and worship any way you choose, as long as you're not hurting anyone else, but there's a price: you have to respect the fact that EVERYONE ELSE has the right to live and worship any way THEY choose - and you don't get to interfere with that. A person's religious freedom ends where another person's rights begin.

It's funny ... Christians often complain about gay people wanting "special" rights, but in fact, they're the ones who want the special rights. They want to be allowed to ignore laws that all non-Christians are expected to obey.

[Solon]

13. What the fuck is being forced on them?

The only thing that could possibly affect them are anti-discrimination laws, and you know what, if they don't want to hire a gay person, or rent them a room in an apartment building you own, well tough shit, you decided to open up businesses that hire people or to provide them with shelter, to the public, and you have to abide by the rules. I don't give a shit if its "disrespectful" of their religion or not. A lot of folks, back in the 1960s had there religious beliefs about race disrespected when they had to comply with the Civil Rights Act, so these so called religious people today can suck it up and follow the law too.

[riderinthestorm]

14. Yes! Bring on the disrespect! Honestly, when it comes down to constitutional rights

vs religious homophobia?!

No brainer.

You're new to DU so I'll cut you some slack but honestly? The constitution says they have to respect the civil rights of everyone in this country regardless of their religion. There's no "force" about it - everyone deserves equality under the law and if someone doesn't agree with THAT (fuck the religiosity), well then I say they get kicked to the curb, with no respect. At. All.

This is a secular nation with laws devised with a strict church/state separation. Don't like it? Move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where clerics make the laws.

[Arkana]

15. What?

We're not keeping them from being Christians--we're just providing for equal rights for gay folks as common decency should suggest and keeping a bunch of Neanderthal bigots and hatemongers from turning us into a theocracy.

[Lil Missy]

17. The more correct question, is it right for them to force bigotry on gays?

As pointed out by another post, gays are not trying to force religious bigots into having gay sex. (As if sex is the entire part of any relationship, but that an entirely new thread and discussion.)

And BTW, some gays are religious too. One could also argue that God made us the way we are. And who are the bigots to question God's plans or decisions.

[Djinn]

19. so you'd be OK

with a doctor refusing to treat any patients who hold to backward beliefs invented by goat herders who thought the sun revolved around the earth because of his atheism?

can I refuse service to any of my members who believe that nonsense?

how about a landlord refusing tenancy to someone because they'll fill the house with pictures of Jesus?

this is about discrimination - not about forcing one's beliefs, those numpties can hold any beliefs they like but refusing service to people on the basis of their sexuality is called DISCRIMINATION it's quite simple really

[Bluebear]

20. Yes, the poor Christians again, having something "shoved down their throat".

Poor oppressed majority.

[BattyDem]

5. How are they losing their religious freedom?

You are free to worship any way you choose ... but this is a DEMOCRACY, which means you are not free to discriminate! If we allow people to discriminate based on their religious beliefs, what's to stop other bigots from forming their own church? "Sorry, my religion forbids me to treat (insert group here) with respect or dignity." :eyes:

Once we allow religion to be an excuse to discriminate against one group of people, it can be used to discriminate against ANY group of people ... and civil rights laws will no longer mean a damn thing.

About the "ominous recent examples" ...

It seems to me that what they're REALLY complaining about is the fact that they can't OPENLY discriminate against people. They can't come right out and say, "I won't do it because you're gay" because there will be repercussions and that's pissing them off. They don't like the fact that they're bigotry is being forced into the closet. You gotta love the irony! :P

[northzax]

9. actually, in many cases

I don't see why people shouldn't be able to refuse business from a customer they don't want to work with. if you're a photographer, you should be able to turn down any job you want to (it's stupid, but you should be able to do it) that's more business for others who will take the job.

as for the church that refused to rent the pavilion, well, as long as the had tax-exempt status on it, and it wasn't a sanctuary, they can suck eggs.

what I think this will actually start to lead to is more and more churches refusing to rent out their spaces to anyone who isn't a member of the congregation. weddings and the like are big moneymakers for a lot of churches, especially to people who aren't regular members of the congregation. I can't tell you how many weddings I have been to in churches where I know the bride nor groom had any connection. if it's only open to congregants, then there's no problem with selection.

[BattyDem]

10. It is my understanding that an independent contractor can turn down a job ...

for any legal reason or even no reason at all. (I've got a friend who's an independent contractor and no one is forcing him to take work he doesn't want to take.) What they can't do is turn down a job for a discriminatory (or illegal) reason, which is what the photographer did ... and she said so. THAT was the reason she was fined. You don't turn down a job by saying, "I won't do it because you're gay" (or black, Jewish, disabled, etc). By doing that, the photographer opened herself up to a lawsuit, so I can't feel sorry for her. She chose to bring the potential client's sexuality into it when she didn't have to.

As for the church, I totally agree with you. If they're going make space available to the general public, then the general public - no matter who they are - should be allowed to rent that space. If they keep the space private and available to members only, that's different.

[eridani]

18. Exactly. Why didn't she just say "I'm overbooked"?

It isn't likely that any potential clients would complain about that.

[Lil Missy]

12. "bigotry forced into the closet". Love the irony indeed!

:P

[sakabatou]

16. Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah-nyah

[ismnotwasm]

6. K&R

[pleah]

7. K&R