[Gibble]

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

Why is that knob your president?

[angelize56]

Massachusetts Catholic Church May Fire Gay Spouses
Thu Jun 17, 2004 01:27 PM ET

BOSTON (Reuters) - The Roman Catholic Church in Massachusetts is considering firing gay employees who marry their same-sex partners in the only American state where such unions are legal, a church official said on Thursday.

"There have been conversations about how one needs to act consistently with the church's teachings and this has been discussed," said Daniel Avila, associate director for policy and research at the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, which formulates public policy for state's four bishops.

Gay marriages were legalized in Massachusetts in May. But the Catholic Church, which has been swept up in a sexual-abuse crisis, opposes the law. The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman and believes homosexuality is unnatural.

"The church has long had a position that the people working on its behalf need to display conduct consistent with the beliefs of the church," Avila said.

The Boston Herald on Thursday reported that memos about employment policies have been sent to bishops.

Christopher Coyne, a spokesman for the Archdiocese of Boston, was not immediately available to comment.

Avila said he does not know of any gays who have been fired by the church for having married a same-sex partner. He added, "this is the first time we've been faced with this issue."

But he also said the church can act according to its beliefs. "Practically and theoretically, we have the right to conduct our activities consistent with our practices," he said.

Boston's archdiocese, which ministers to roughly 2 million Catholics in the region, has faced financial problems and seen attendance shrink recently as it moves past a scandal where priests molested young children, often boys.

[~Candy~]

Originally Posted by angelize56

Massachusetts Catholic Church May Fire Gay Spouses
Thu Jun 17, 2004 01:27 PM ET

BOSTON (Reuters) - The Roman Catholic Church in Massachusetts is considering firing gay employees who marry their same-sex partners in the only American state where such unions are legal, a church official said on Thursday.

Sounds like a lawyer's dream to me

[angelize56]

Will you be testifying Reverend Candy?

[brushmaster1]

Let me get this straight... the Catholic church won't fire pedophiles, but will fire gay employees if they marry?

[~Candy~]

Originally Posted by brushmaster1

Let me get this straight... the Catholic church won't fire pedophiles, but will fire gay employees if they marry?

Actually, they fire pedophiles, but then hire them back in higher positions

Talk about hypocrisy at its finest Only in the name of religion, of course. Try that in the private job sector

[plschwartz]

Candy;
Thats because what the priests did was similar to an age-old ritual.
Except here it was a laying on of the glans

[Gibble]

Originally Posted by brushmaster1

Let me get this straight... the Catholic church won't fire pedophiles, but will fire gay employees if they marry?

Lets clarify that a tad. PEDOPHILES and RAPISTS...the two lowest rungs on the criminal ladder. Mass murderers rank higher.

[angelize56]

Jul 10, 2:26 PM EDT

Bush Seeks Amendment Against Gay Marriage

By PETE YOST
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush says legalizing gay marriage would redefine the most fundamental institution of civilization and that a constitutional amendment is needed to protect it.

A few activist judges and local officials have taken it on themselves to change the meaning of marriage, Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address.

Leading the chorus of support for an amendment, Bush said, "If courts create their own arbitrary definition of marriage as a mere legal contract, and cut marriage off from its cultural, religious and natural roots, then the meaning of marriage is lost and the institution is weakened."

His remarks follow the opening of Senate debate Friday on a constitutional amendment effectively banning gay marriage.

Reflecting the election-year sensitivity of the issue, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Republicans are using the constitutional amendment as a bulletin board for campaign sloganeering.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, accused Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry of holding inconsistent positions.

Kerry and running mate Sen. John Edwards oppose gay marriage, but support civil unions.

Bush says a constitutional amendment is needed to protect the traditional definition of marriage.

Bush singled out Massachusetts' Supreme Judicial Court, which called marriage an evolving paradigm. "That sends a message to the next generation that marriage has no enduring meaning, and that ages of moral teaching and human experience have nothing to teach us about this institution," he said.

The president urged the House and Senate to send to the states for ratification an amendment that defines marriage in the United States as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

Senate Democrats signaled they will not throw barriers in front of the resolution, paving the way for a vote on the amendment as early as next Wednesday.

A constitutional amendment should never be undertaken lightly, Bush said, "yet to defend marriage, our nation has no other choice."

The vote puts some Democrats and Republicans in a difficult position. One senator acknowledged the political risk in trying to walk a line supporting both traditional marriage and gay rights.

"I intend to be your champion on many issues in the future, if you want me," Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., said in remarks directed at gay and lesbian voters. Smith is a leader in efforts to make attacks against homosexuals a federal hate crime.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest gay political organization, said the president and congressional allies "should focus on the priorities of the American people, not the agenda of their extremist base."

[iltos]

i believe that this whole "traditional marriage" thing is a kind of social carrot...its hung out in front of everybody as the norm, an "institution", even a sacred....as tho not being married is a failure of dreams

in this particular instance, we have a whole group of society...for the most part tax payers, church goers, voters, just like most of the rest of us...who are denied the carrot...and let's face it, the grounds for denial are based on biblical interpretation...the corruption of the institution arguement is a joke....how is it going to be any more corrupted than it currently is?... by those who think they want it, but have no idea how to be "in" a marriage, and so divorce and remarry throughout their lives, all with a minimum of social or institutional backlash.

those who find it sacred in some way will not be harmed....well, that's not true, is it?...there will always be those who will feel somehow cheapened because what they did can now be done by homosexuals

is the goal of an amendment, then, to protect the moral integrity of these good folks?

i dunno....

[angelize56]

Published July 12, 2004

Cheneys' stances differ on gay marriage

Washington — Lynne Cheney, the vice president's wife and mother of a lesbian, said Sunday that states should have the final say over the legal status of personal relationships.

That stand puts her at odds with the vice president on the need for the constitutional amendment now under debate in the Senate that effectively would ban gay marriage.

"I think that the constitutional amendment discussion will give us an opportunity to look for ways to discuss ways in which we can keep the authority of the states intact," Cheney told CNN's "Late Edition."

Cheney has two daughters, both of whom are working in his campaign. The Cheneys' gay daughter, Mary, is director of vice presidential operations for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign. She held a public role as her father's assistant in the 2000 campaign and helped the GOP recruit gay voters during the 2002 midterm elections.

During the 2000 campaign, vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney took the position states should decide legal issues about personal relationships and that people should be free to enter relationships of their choosing.

President Bush said in his weekly radio address Saturday that legalizing gay marriage would redefine the most fundamental institution of civilization. A constitutional amendment is needed to protect marriage, he said.

Both Bush and Cheney have voiced their support this year for the proposed constitutional amendment. Their Democratic rivals, Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina, oppose the amendment.

The Democrats also oppose gay marriage, but defend a gay couple's rights to the same legal protections as those conferred in marriage.

Lynne Cheney said the situation in 2004 is somewhat different from the one four years ago because of the Massachusetts court ruling and its effect on states.

Asked again about the difference between the Democrats and the Bush administration on the amendment, Cheney reaffirmed her preference for local solutions.

The vice president's press office had no immediate comment Sunday.

[angelize56]

Regarding the senate hearings...I think Ted Kennedy went a bit far when he used the words "rabid religious right"! Who does he think he is practically condemning anyone who happens to believe that marriage should remain defined as "between a man and a woman"! to him!

[plschwartz]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona broke forcefully with President Bush and the Senate GOP leadership Tuesday evening over the issue of same-sex marriage, taking to the Senate floor to call a constitutional amendment to prohibit the practice unnecessary -- and un-Republican.

"The constitutional amendment we're debating today strikes me as antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans," McCain said. "It usurps from the states a fundamental authority they have always possessed and imposes a federal remedy for a problem that most states do not believe confronts them."

McCain also said the amendment "will not be adopted by Congress this year, nor next year, nor any time soon until a substantial majority of Americans are persuaded that such a consequential action is as vitally important and necessary as the proponents feel it is today."

"The founders wisely made certain that the Constitution is difficult to amend and, as a practical political matter, can't be done without overwhelming public approval. And thank God for that," he said.

The proposed amendment will likely die Wednesday in the Senate if GOP leaders cannot muster the 60 votes needed to overcome a procedural hurdle that would allow them to move it to the floor. With most Democrats and a number of moderate Republicans opposed, clearing that hurdle is considered unlikely. (Full story)

McCain said he would side with opponents of the amendment on the procedural vote in order to make clear to his constituents that he is against the amendment itself.

Bush, who defeated McCain for the Republican presidential nomination in 2000, has championed the amendment, saying it is necessary to defend the institution of marriage from "activist judges." Social conservatives have been pushing hard for the measure since May, when Massachusetts' highest court legalized same-sex marriages in the Bay State.

But McCain argued on the Senate floor that there are "far less draconian" remedies, including the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act -- which defined marriage for purposes of federal law as a union between a man and a woman and allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other states -- and state constitutional amendments limiting marriage to heterosexual couples.

He said if the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down DOMA or "state remedies to judicial activism fail," then amending the federal Constitution might be "appropriate." But he said the decision in Massachusetts to legalize same-sex marriages does "not represent a death knell to marriage."

"What evidence do we have that states are incapable of further exercising an authority they have exercised successfully for over 200 years?" McCain said. "We will have to wait a little longer to see of Armageddon has arrived."

[plschwartz]

Originally Posted by angelize56

Published July 12, 2004

Cheneys' stances differ on gay marriage
During the 2000 campaign, vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney took the position states should decide legal issues about personal relationships and that people should be free to enter relationships of their choosing.

President Bush said in his weekly radio address Saturday that legalizing gay marriage would redefine the most fundamental institution of civilization. A constitutional amendment is needed to protect marriage, he said.

Both Bush and Cheney have voiced their support this year for the proposed constitutional amendment. Their Democratic rivals, Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina, oppose the amendment.

The Democrats also oppose gay marriage, but defend a gay couple's rights to the same legal protections as those conferred in marriage.
.

[Tipacanoe]

If marriage is so sacred and contributes so much to family stability etc, why don't Angel and other members of the rabid right ( (: - ) ) welcome gays into the institution? Seems to me nothing but good could come of happy families and citizens who don't feel like they are being treated as "outsiders".

Is it any wonder that people outside the US regard it as the most racist and intolerant democracy in the world when so many Americans seek to continue to marginalize (and actually institutionalize that marginalization in the constitution) yet another group of taxpaying countrymen and women?