Catholic Church Throws Temper Tantrum in D.C.

"I don't know where the compromise would be."

It is the next day, and now we have more information. It appears I was a little unclear about why exactly the Church was so pissed. The Church will not be required to perform marriage ceremonies or rent space to gay couple getting hitched (I was mistaken about that second one), however, they will be required to allow gays to adopt from their adoption centers, they will be required to give spousal benefits to any of their employees' same-sex partners, and you know, not discriminate with the money given to them by the city.

Quote :

Several council members said Thursday that Church officials miscalculated by saying this week that their Catholic Charities organization will have to end its contracts with the city if the proposal passes without changes.

"It's a dangerous thing when the Catholic Church starts writing and determining the legislation and the laws of the District of Columbia," said council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), chairman of the Human Services Committee.

I really have to agree here. The Catholic Church is overstepping their boundaries by giving this ultimatum. They are a leading force in the city, yes, but they are still just a church. They do not get to give the government ultimatums. That's not how our country, and as the D.C. Council has shown, certainly not how our capitol is run.

Quote :

Susan Gibbs, a spokeswoman for the archdiocese, countered that the city is "the one giving the ultimatum."

The city didn't threaten to withold services from the poor.

Quote :

Church officials say Catholic Charities would have to suspend its social services work for the city, rather than provide employee benefits to same-sex married couples or allow them to adopt.

Are you kidding me? Instead of paying the benefits to what few gay couples probably work for you, you'd rather turn out people who have no where else to go? You'd rather stop providing for the homeless, stop having safe shelters for women and children, stop providing hypothermia shelters in a winter that is supposed to be fucking horrible this year, because you have to pay some benefits?!. The Catholic Church just said that they would rather let people freeze to death this winter rather than pay a few lousy benefits!

Quote :

Late Thursday, however, Graham said he had changed his mind after reviewing same-sex marriage laws in New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont. He asked why the Church has not abandoned services in those states.

"If the Catholic Church has been able to adjust in Connecticut, I think they can certainly adjust here," Graham said.

Yeah, actually, I wondered about that. Consistency, please.

Quote :

Catholic Charities in Boston halted its adoption programs with the city because Massachusetts requires that agencies not discriminate against same-sex couples as potential parents.

That's not quite the same thing as turning out people on to the streets in the middle of winter.

Quote :

"It seems to me if they choose not to provide those services, we will have to find someone else," Gray said.

There's Episcopalians in D.C. (the liberal faction). I'm sure they'll be quite happy to have those contracts.

Quote :

More than 200 members of the city's clergy who support same-sex marriage issued a statement Thursday denouncing Church's stance. "To hold hostage the rights of human beings over this, I think, is just really despicable," said the Rev. Dennis W. Wiley, co-chairman of D.C. Clergy United for Marriage Equality. "There are others who can step up to the plate who would love to have the contracts."

Other Catholics think you're being assholes! Clue: That's not good.

Quote :

Some Catholics also expressed their frustration with the Church. "It's totally embarrassing," said Kathy Boylan, a member of the peace movement Catholic Worker.

Quote :

But Alexandra Smith, who heads the College Republicans, said, "The Church, like any other private institution, has the right to operate freely and in a manner that is in accordance with its principles

I actually agree with this. They have every right to refuse gays. But by doing that, they no longer have rights to city money. You don't get to pick and choose.

Quote :

Council member Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5) said the Church, which has tax-exempt property and often interacts with the city government, should be wary of picking a fight.

Translation: "Stop pushing your luck."

I imagine somebody's going to get a phone call from some other archbishop or cardinal and they'll shut the hell up.

You know who else holds people's lives and safety hostage until their demands - often for money and conditions - are met?

Terrorists.

This isn't a temper tantrum. This is full-on low-down trying to hold Columbia hostage. And they're not even doing it very well.

And just like with terrorists, if you give in to their demands, you'll have to pay a higher price next time.

Lapin wrote:

It appears I was a little unclear about why exactly the Church was so pissed. The Church will not be required to perform marriage ceremonies or rent space to gay couple getting hitched (I was mistaken about that second one), however, they will be required to allow gays to adopt from their adoption centers, they will be required to give spousal benefits to any of their employees' same-sex partners, and you know, not discriminate with the money given to them by the city.

I figured it was something like that; the Catholic Church in the UK threw a fit and said it'd have to close its childcare/adoption services for the same reason. Closing down unrelated services like homeless shelters would be going rather further, though.

Lapin wrote:

Susan Gibbs, a spokeswoman for the archdiocese, countered that the city is "the one giving the ultimatum."

NO U!

ZoZo wrote:

Remember that bit in the Bible where Jesus refused to heal lepers because they were big dirty queers?

Or the bit where he refused to help a Canaanite woman's possessed daughter because she wasn't Jewish...oh wait, that's actually in there.

Keith Fraser wrote:

Lapin wrote:

It appears I was a little unclear about why exactly the Church was so pissed. The Church will not be required to perform marriage ceremonies or rent space to gay couple getting hitched (I was mistaken about that second one), however, they will be required to allow gays to adopt from their adoption centers, they will be required to give spousal benefits to any of their employees' same-sex partners, and you know, not discriminate with the money given to them by the city.

I figured it was something like that; the Catholic Church in the UK threw a fit and said it'd have to close its childcare/adoption services for the same reason. Closing down unrelated services like homeless shelters would be going rather further, though.

Lapin wrote:

Susan Gibbs, a spokeswoman for the archdiocese, countered that the city is "the one giving the ultimatum."

NO U!

ZoZo wrote:

Remember that bit in the Bible where Jesus refused to heal lepers because they were big dirty queers?

Or the bit where he refused to help a Canaanite woman's possessed daughter because she wasn't Jewish...oh wait, that's actually in there.

Except he did help the girl...after playing some mind games with the mother, of course.

Lapin wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Lapin wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Feeble minded chumpy Capitols fans who are dependent on a massive amount of pills to stay halfway sane and not depressed don't get to be condescending. :psy-4:

You finally realized you have no room to be condescending. I'm so proud.

I'm not a Capitols fan and I don't take happy pills.

I'm a different pot a failure. A better looking one, if nothing else. :psy-4: :psy-4:

Hate to burst your happy bubble of stupid, but I don't take medication. I've been off it for nearly a year.

And as for your sad little delusions, I've seen pictures of you. You can't hold a candle to me.

1.) People who can barely pass college algebra don't get to be smug.
2.) You've only seen pictures of me with a shirt on.

Psy-4 wrote:

From your overuse of my icon, I can see you are trying too hard to be like me. Don't. You already have your icon.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

I'm a different pot a failure. A better looking one, if nothing else.

You are a different pot of failure. One that badly needs a haircut and is so hideous that one more hit with an ugly stick could potentially bring you full circle.

1.) I has haircut.
2.) I don't know what the hell my icon is supposed to be. :unskilled78: Nihilist got rid of the better of my two icons. :redangry:

Nihilist wrote:

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

I'm a different pot a failure. A better looking one, if nothing else.

Celibate Catholic nuns get more action than Mikey, for fuck's sake. That's saying a lot

Made a macro for you:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Fukken saved.

Harley Quinn hyenaholic wrote:

You know who else holds people's lives and safety hostage until their demands - often for money and conditions - are met?

Terrorists.

This isn't a temper tantrum. This is full-on low-down trying to hold Columbia hostage. And they're not even doing it very well.

And just like with terrorists, if you give in to their demands, you'll have to pay a higher price next time.

Incorrect. This is a refusal to provide services (as in, goods and services, not religious services) until conditions are met.
That's called a strike.

So when are you going to correct the typo in the thread title, Lapin?

Call me anal-retentive or whatever, but it's driving me crazy. Sorry.

Does anyone else miss the times back on GAFF when people at least tried to use proper spelling and grammar? This is not an attack directed against you, Lapin, this is a comment about the decline in attention and care in general. We used to laugh at fanbrat authors who couldn't even be bothered to correct mistakes in the title of their fanfic.

Oh my gawd, I thought I checked. Thank you for pointing it out!

Lapin wrote:

Oh my gawd, I thought I checked. Thank you for pointing it out!

<3 Thank you for reacting like a sensible adult. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]