Faith Groups Increasingly Lose Gay Rights Fights

[tomm2thumbs]

Source: Washington Post

Last August, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Guadalupe Benitez, who is a lesbian, when she sued the North Coast Women's Care Medical Group after doctors said their religious beliefs prevented them from artificially inseminating her. "We were devastated," said Benitez, 37, who has been with partner Joanne Clark for almost two decades. Sexual orientation "should never have been an issue," she said. "The issue was that I had a medical condition."

The court ruled that North Coast Women's Care did not have a free-speech right or a religious exemption from the state antidiscrimination law.

<reverse snip>

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.

-- 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.

... gay groups and liberal legal scholars say they are prevailing because an individual's religious views about homosexuality cannot be used to violate gays' right to equal treatment under the law.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040904063.html

---

There is some nasty treatment going on out there for some basic services that ought not to be politicized - no wonder the laws are stepping in to right the wrongs.

[cliffordu]

1. Really. My schaedenfreud funnybone is aroused with this.

[Fenris]

2. Yay.

[DCKit]

3. An Xtian psychologist? That's just.... nuts.

If these various groups are going to run their businesses on a "faith-based first" approach, then potential clients need to be advised up-front and before any money changes hands.

[Hissyspit]

4. Good.

[Optical.Catalyst]

5. "Faith Groups Lose" - Headlines that I like to see

Anytime those right wing fundamentalists get put in their place is good. And a good time was had by all!

[and-justice-for-all]

6. GOOD!

They think they have some special right to be bigoted pricks, when they really don't!

[Jawja]

7. Certainly they don't, because being

a religious bigot is a choice, and it's the wrong choice.

[Rebubula]

8. Adults

Adults that follow a 2000 year old novel are rather amusing to me.

Seriously, die already Organized Religion....

[Thor_MN]

10. More like an 1500-1800 year old collection of novellas, but I agree with

I can't imagine anyone in the year 3809 taking what I could write today about George Washington as the absolute, literal, unerring truth , so...

[mrs_p]

9. at the end of the article, it says:

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University who supports same-sex marriage, said the Bob Jones ruling "puts us on a slippery slope that inevitably takes us to the point where we punish religious groups because of their religious views."

i don't understand why taking away tax exemption from organizations is punishment because of their religious views. it just means they don't get special privileges for being discriminatory.

[Kaleva]

13. Religious organizations are by definition discriminatory

Behave a certain way and one gets to go to Heaven.

[droidamus2]

11. My problem with these groups ...

My problem with these 'religious' groups it always seems like their non-religious bigotry, intolerance and conservative political positions come first and then they bring in their religion as sort of a protective umbrella to say it is all okay. I think these people should grow up and just admit that for whatever reason 'gayness' freaks them out and they don't like it. Not because their religion 'tells' them but just because they are uptight people that can't handle those that are different. You ever notice with these people that their 'agenda' is always good but if anybody else has an 'agenda' it is bad? What's up with that?

[JerseygirlCT]

12. They're losing because

they don't have a legal leg to stand on.

Because they're wrong.

But I don't imagine that will prevent the outcries of "religious persecution!" from these bigots.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. The are losing because they are wrong

And they are wrong even if one only looks to their own Scriptures. They are wrong in my context as well as their own.
99% of those who claim religous faith simply do not practice their own faith. They do not know the teachings, just the preachings, and their 'practice' is devoid of meaning, as it is based on nothing. They don't follow the whole of the teachings of Jesus, nor of Paul, nor of Moses. Not of all nor of any one of them. They do as they please, and find sayings to support their desires.

[GinaMaria]

15. How do these cases impact their religious freedom?

that they say are costing them their religious freedom

They are free to practice a religious lifestyle if they choose, even if others do not. No one is stopping them from practicing their faith.

If their religion dictates they violate the rights of others, then we have a conflict and it needs to be set straight (no pun intended) ASAP, Their rights end where another person's begins.

Loonies, losing court cases does not take away your religious freedom when you've attempted to violate the rights of others.

[gratuitous]

16. Yeah, but we'll keep fighting them

I mean, the BMC has had a rough go of it the last 33 years, but we're still plugging away for the full participation of our gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered/intersexed sisters and brothers in the life of our communities and our congregations, districts and denominations. And even though we've lost just about every fight, we'll keep fighting.

Oh, that's not what the article is about, is it? It appears to be about bigotry dressed up in the language of religion, which seems to fool a startling number of people on all sides of these disputes.

[Realityhack]

17. Here is an idea... if you are morally opposed to nudity... don't become a stripper

and if you are morally opposed to birth control or artificial insemination (for some) don't become a doctor or a pharmacist. It is in their job description.

I often substitute black for 'lesbian' or 'unmarried' when I see these stories to see how people might feel about a doctor who say refused to do an AI procedure based on race (an equally protected status).

This is not an attack on peoples freedom of religion. They are free to believe and practice as they will. However, certain jobs require you to treat all people equally. Just like a stripper is required to strip. If that offends you take a job where you are not required to treat people equally or don't have to interact with them in a way that matters to you.

[GinaMaria]

18. What a great idea! and well said.

This is not an attack on peoples freedom of religion. They are free to believe and practice as they will. However, certain jobs require you to treat all people equally. Just like a stripper is required to strip. If that offends you take a job where you are not required to treat people equally or don't have to interact with them in a way that matters to you.

At what point are these folks told to back off? I guess it has to be the courts that tell them that. What a sad waste of time and resources spent on petty nonsense.