Faith Groups Increasingly Lose Gay Rights Fights

[Eric P]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/09/AR2009040904063_pf.html

Faith Groups Increasingly Lose Gay Rights Fights

By Jacqueline L. Salmon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 10, 2009; A04

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.

"It really is all about religious liberty for us," said Scott Hoffman, chief administrative officer of a New Jersey Methodist group, the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, which lost a property tax exemption after it declined to allow its beachside pavilion to be used for a same-sex union ceremony. "The protection to not be forced to do something that is against deeply held religious principles."

But 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.

"We are not required to pay the price for other people's religious views about us," said Jennifer Pizer, director of the Marriage Project for Lambda Legal, a gay rights legal advocacy group.

Twelve states now offer some form of same-sex marriage or same-sex partner recognition. Twenty states -- including Maryland -- and more than 180 cities and counties, including the District, ban discrimination against gays, according to the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group. Virginia bans it against state employees.

These laws generally offer some type of exemption to religious entities when hiring employees. But some groups are working to expand that exemption to include commercial businesses to protect owners and their employees when exercising their religious views.

Gay rights groups said they do not object to making faith groups' religious jobs exempt from the discrimination laws but that offering services to the public is different.

"In their role as a participant in the marketplace, they are being required to do that in a non-discriminatory way," said Brian Moulton, Human Rights Campaign senior counsel.

Battles are increasingly including private businesses. 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.

Sometimes, organizations that don't wish to serve gays give in rather than go to court.

The online dating site eHarmony agreed to provide gay and lesbian matchmaking services to settle a complaint by a gay New Jersey man accusing it of discrimination. The new site, CompatiblePartners.net, started Tuesday.

The site eHarmony, founded by evangelical psychologist Neil Clark Warren, does not provide a same-sex option. Warren said his research into successful relationships did not include same-sex couples.

Company attorneys said that it settled because of the unpredictable nature of litigation and that New Jersey's attorney general did not find that eHarmony had violated the state's anti-discrimination law.

"People seem to say that if you enter the world of commerce, you lose all your First Amendment rights" to free exercise of religion, said Jordan Lorence, senior counsel at the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization that has represented several businesses. "They . . . have become nothing more than vending machines, and the government can dictate the conditions under which they dispense their goods and services."

Even when groups opposing homosexuality have prevailed in court, they have gone on to face other setbacks. The Boy Scouts of America won a lawsuit in 2000 because it did not allow openly gay Scouts or Scout leaders. Since then, some private charities have refused to support the Scouts, and some local governments have yanked free use of facilities and other benefits. In Philadelphia, the city is demanding that the Scouts pay $200,000 in annual rent for a building that they had been using rent-free. The dispute is in court.

Some scholars also point to Bob Jones University, which lost its tax exemption over a ban on interracial dating and marriage among students, even though it claimed that those beliefs were religiously grounded. Some legal analysts suggest that religious groups that do not support gay rights might lose their tax exemptions because of their politically unpopular views.

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."

Both sides predict more litigation as gay rights bump up against strong religious beliefs.

Marc Stern, general counsel for American Jewish Congress, said: "When you have a change that is as dramatic as has happened in the last 10 to 15 years with regards to attitudes toward homosexuality, it's inevitable it's going to reverberate in dozens of places in the law that you're never going to be able to foresee."

i think that faith groups and gays should come together over their similarities

for example

both groups spend a lot of time on their knees.

[Guybrush Threepwood]

[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

So unbelievably stupid.

[FlameOfCallandor]

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.

Wow thats crazy.

[Brehvolution]

America - Land of the free, home of the brave

or

America - Land of conservative views, home of righteous assholes

[FlameOfCallandor]

America - Land of the free, home of the brave

or

America - Land of conservative views, home of righteous assholes

I see that you didnt read the article. Good going.

[Brehvolution]

America - Land of the free, home of the brave

or

America - Land of conservative views, home of righteous assholes

I see that you didnt read the article. Good going.

Obviously, you missed the bottom part of my post. There would be none of this litigation if people weren't using their religious views to deny people services based on their sexual orientation.

[FlameOfCallandor]

So should a black person be forced to photograph a KKK meeting? Or should a gay person be forced to photograph a Mormon ceremony. Or should anyone be forced photograph a scientology meeting.

Thats fucked up.

[Tauntaun]

[youtube=560,345]XT2UmZxzmjs[/youtube]



"draaaayyyaaag queens"

"they come to the window, taptaptap"

[lordmaji]

[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

So unbelievably stupid.

 

that is amazing.

[Brehvolution]

So should a black person be forced to photograph a KKK meeting? Or should a gay person be forced to photograph a Mormon ceremony. Or should anyone be forced photograph a scientology meeting.

Thats fucked up.

I can see why you latched on to the photography part because it's very vague.

[FlameOfCallandor]

So should a black person be forced to photograph a KKK meeting? Or should a gay person be forced to photograph a Mormon ceremony. Or should anyone be forced photograph a scientology meeting.

Thats fucked up.

I can see why you latched on to the photography part because it's very vague.

-- 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.

Dont be a dumb shit.

[BlueTsunami]

The persecution of Christians! Feel the wrath of the gays, its payback bitches.

But seriously, there's no middle ground. Christians just don't want gays to exist at all, or interact with them. Don't know how they'll survive in this modern day society.

[tiesto]

I'm straight as an arrow but nothing puts a bigger smile on my face than Christian schaudenfraude

[Cheebs]

FoC the photographer got in trouble because she refused to do so for discriminatory reasons.

It'd be like a black couple hiring a photographer for their wedding and her saying "no I wont do it because you're black." she'd get sued in a instant. Same thing.

[Cheebs]

and your kkk/scientology examples don't hold up. those are organizations that people CHOOSE to join. homosexuality is something not chosen, much like race. which is why it can get you into a shitload of trouble. you really don't understand the situation at all.

[BlueTsunami]

[youtube=560,345]H6p_aESYqtg[/youtube]

[GilloD]

Can we stop using the word "Christian" as a catch all? There are many, many, many progressive, clear headed Christians who are a-okay with gay marriage. These fucking nut jobs do not represent the majority.

[Cheebs]

Can we stop using the word "Christian" as a catch all? There are many, many, many progressive, clear headed Christians who are a-okay with gay marriage. These fucking nut jobs do not represent the majority.

The majority of christians in America are easily anti-gay marriage.

[Eric P]

Can we stop using the word "Christian" as a catch all? There are many, many, many progressive, clear headed Christians who are a-okay with gay marriage. These fucking nut jobs do not represent the majority.

i started using Evangelical until i met a few that were level headed and cool.

now i am back to using Christian Right to represent social right leaning christians, though the term kind of went out of vogue in the 90s

[Guybrush Threepwood]

I was talking to my mother today about religion.

She was saying that's it's bad to tell children about reason and science but okay to tell them about God and religion. Her reasoning? Because children shouldn't think for themselves. smh.

[GilloD]

Can we stop using the word "Christian" as a catch all? There are many, many, many progressive, clear headed Christians who are a-okay with gay marriage. These fucking nut jobs do not represent the majority.

The majority of christians in America are easily anti-gay marriage.

The vocal majority, maybe. I think you'd be surprised at the large number of liberal churches, which I think will see huge growth in coming years. They're just quieter because they're not closet homos.

[brawndolicious]

I think that most "christians" don't have a problem with gays but they're too afraid to vote for pro-gay legislation.

[Cheebs]

I was talking to my mother today about religion.

She was saying that's it's bad to tell children about reason and science but okay to tell them about God and religion. Her reasoning? Because children shouldn't think for themselves. smh.

Man things like that make me glad I grew up with the family I did. My parents aren't religious and are pro-gay marriage. And my grandparents as well aren't religious and are also pro-gay marriage.

[Mr. Gundam]

Can we stop using the word "Christian" as a catch all? There are many, many, many progressive, clear headed Christians who are a-okay with gay marriage. These fucking nut jobs do not represent the majority.

The majority of christians in America are easily anti-gay marriage.

The vocal majority, maybe. I think you'd be surprised at the large number of liberal churches, which I think will see huge growth in coming years. They're just quieter because they're not closet homos.

I'm glad someone else is reasonable here. Cheebs' rampant hatred of all Christians is really annoying and honestly no better than the homophobic Religious Right.

The Stranger (Seattle Alt. Weekly) has had some really interesting discussions on this lately:
http://slog.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/

[Phoenix Dark]

FoC the photographer got in trouble because she refused to do so for discriminatory reasons.

It'd be like a black couple hiring a photographer for their wedding and her saying "no I wont do it because you're black." she'd get sued in a instant. Same thing.

Was it a private photographer, like many wedding photographers are? If so he had every right to refuse work.

The rest of the examples given were pretty weak though. Religious freedoms aren't being infringed here - I mean, unless the government starts stepping in and making churches (or church organizations) hire/fire based on diversity...yeah

[Madrun Badrun]

FoC the photographer got in trouble because she refused to do so for discriminatory reasons.

It'd be like a black couple hiring a photographer for their wedding and her saying "no I wont do it because you're black." she'd get sued in a instant. Same thing.

Was it a private photographer, like many wedding photographers are? If so he had every right to refuse work.

The rest of the examples given were pretty weak though. Religious freedoms aren't being infringed here - I mean, unless the government starts stepping in and making churches (or church organizations) hire/fire based on diversity...yeah

.

[Enl]

*video of drag queens beating up a helpless Memphis McDonalds*


"draaaayyyaaag queens"

"they come to the window, taptaptap"

Memphis represent!

spoiler (click to show/hide)

:'( :'( :'(

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

FoC the photographer got in trouble because she refused to do so for discriminatory reasons.

It'd be like a black couple hiring a photographer for their wedding and her saying "no I wont do it because you're black." she'd get sued in a instant. Same thing.

Was it a private photographer, like many wedding photographers are? If so he had every right to refuse work.

The rest of the examples given were pretty weak though. Religious freedoms aren't being infringed here - I mean, unless the government starts stepping in and making churches (or church organizations) hire/fire based on diversity...yeah

I dunno, can restaurants refuse to serve people based on this same criteria?

How is a public restaurant franchise comparable to a private photographer?

[BlueTsunami]

Denying service is denying service. Its the same thing, the photographer just serves one person instead of a group of them. Its not like the lesbians would start scissoring at the reception or something

[Mr. Gundam]

[Eric P]

holy fuck

holy FUCK

they are calling their 2 million people march 2M4M

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHa

[Madrun Badrun]

FoC the photographer got in trouble because she refused to do so for discriminatory reasons.

It'd be like a black couple hiring a photographer for their wedding and her saying "no I wont do it because you're black." she'd get sued in a instant. Same thing.

Was it a private photographer, like many wedding photographers are? If so he had every right to refuse work.

The rest of the examples given were pretty weak though. Religious freedoms aren't being infringed here - I mean, unless the government starts stepping in and making churches (or church organizations) hire/fire based on diversity...yeah

I dunno, can restaurants refuse to serve people based on this same criteria?

It's a different circumstance.  Serving a gay couple at a restaurant is not the same as partaking in their marriage ceremony. 

[Eric P]

No it isn't a different circumstance.  Are you people fucking distinguished mentally-challenged?

2M4M

[Phoenix Dark]

Wait, what? Both are private entities that provide a service.  You're making an error because you can't see how the two are related.

But they aren't private. A restaurant franchise is required to preform under certain laws, health and otherwise. A private photographer can choose his or her work as she sees fit.

My dad has his own dental business. So while he owns the building/business/etc and is in charge of how things run, there are certain laws and regulations his practice is required to follow - such as OSHA. Under these regulations it's considered discriminatory if he refuses services to an HIV positive patient for instance.

article: http://www.chicagofreepress.com/node/1650

Her private business was labeled as a "public accommodation" similar to a restaurant, which is what you're arguing. I disagree considering she has a private, one person business where she can choose what she wants to do. If she doesn't want to take work from a gay couple she should have that right.

[Mr. Gundam]

2M4M....

Dan brought it up earlier today: The National Organization for Marriage's push for two million supporters of "traditional marriage" in each state, a mission summed up with the hilariously unfortunate acronym 2M4M.

Which brings us to this bit of info sent in by Slog tipper Akbar:

    Re: National Organization for Marriage: They want to organize this silly "2 million for marriage" march, or 2M4M. A good friend of mine actually owns the domain. 2M4M.org and is hosting a lovely stance of "two men for marriage."

    The site doesn't have much yet but will have more in the future. Hopefully the URL is good enough to fool many of the idiots of NOM.

From the leaked audition tapes to their klutzy choice of acronyms, NOM is the gift that keeps on giving...Thank you, Akbar and Akbar's good friend.

[BlueTsunami]

What does that acronym stand for? 2 Million 4 Marriage?

[Mr. Gundam]

2 Million (Gays) 4 Marriage!

Boy, that would really scare the fuck out of the religious right, wouldn't it?

[Cheebs]

I'm glad someone else is reasonable here. Cheebs' rampant hatred of all Christians is really annoying and honestly no better than the homophobic Religious Right.

Are you trying to claim I am wrong to state the majority of christians are anti-gay marriage? Because the majority of the population in America is anti-gay marriage. Clearly the number is even higher amongst Christians. My statement was 100% valid.

[Eric P]

2 Million (Gays) 4 Marriage!

Boy, that would really scare the fuck out of the religious right, wouldn't it?

2m4m4dp

[Phoenix Dark]

All businesses operate under laws, both health and otherwise, PD.  You're making a distinction (for whatever reason) that restaurants are public and photographers are private.  Now let me ask you, can the photographer hire based on race?

You're introducing facts that are irrelevant to the case, and totally different. This case involves a private, free lance photographer who accepts work from married couples. If she does not want to take work from someone she should have that right.

[Cheebs]

All businesses operate under laws, both health and otherwise, PD.  You're making a distinction (for whatever reason) that restaurants are public and photographers are private.  Now let me ask you, can the photographer hire based on race?

You're introducing facts that are irrelevant to the case, and totally different. This case involves a private, free lance photographer who accepts work from married couples. If she does not want to take work from someone she should have that right.

yes but you can't to deny them due to discriminatory reasons, be it their race or sexuality. I can't refuse to hire someone because they are black, same goes for if they are gay. It is the same situation.

[Mr. Gundam]

I'm glad someone else is reasonable here. Cheebs' rampant hatred of all Christians is really annoying and honestly no better than the homophobic Religious Right.

Are you trying to claim I am wrong to state the majority of christians are anti-gay marriage? Because the majority of the population in America is anti-gay marriage. Clearly the number is even higher amongst Christians. My statement was 100% valid.

No, it's your kneejerk reaction about how all Christians are horrible people. It's childish.

[BlueTsunami]

All businesses operate under laws, both health and otherwise, PD.  You're making a distinction (for whatever reason) that restaurants are public and photographers are private.  Now let me ask you, can the photographer hire based on race?

You're introducing facts that are irrelevant to the case, and totally different. This case involves a private, free lance photographer who accepts work from married couples. If she does not want to take work from someone she should have that right.

Working conditions other than gender, race, religious belief and sexual preference?

[Eric P]

Do your research.  Elane phototography is a company (not freelance!) that does photography for a number of things, and they explicitly stated that they didn't do same sex weddings.

research?

sir, have you never argued on the internet before?

[Cheebs]

I'm glad someone else is reasonable here. Cheebs' rampant hatred of all Christians is really annoying and honestly no better than the homophobic Religious Right.

Are you trying to claim I am wrong to state the majority of christians are anti-gay marriage? Because the majority of the population in America is anti-gay marriage. Clearly the number is even higher amongst Christians. My statement was 100% valid.

No, it's your kneejerk reaction about how all Christians are horrible people. It's childish.

When the hell did I say that? I said the MAJORITY are anti-gay marriage, which is a fact. I never said all are. And when did I say all christians are horrible or even call christians horrible in the first place?

Stop making things up.

[Cheebs]

Hell, I've been accused of being too pro-catholic at this board and I am pretty sure they are christian lol.

[Madrun Badrun]

All businesses operate under laws, both health and otherwise, PD.  You're making a distinction (for whatever reason) that restaurants are public and photographers are private.  Now let me ask you, can the photographer hire based on race?

You're introducing facts that are irrelevant to the case, and totally different. This case involves a private, free lance photographer who accepts work from married couples. If she does not want to take work from someone she should have that right.

yes but you can't to deny them due to discriminatory reasons, be it their race or sexuality. I can't refuse to hire someone because they are black, same goes for if they are gay. It is the same situation.

It depends on if she is denying them because of the fact that they are gay or because she doesn't support gay marriage.  The two are not the same thing.  Gay marriage is a religious issue, as stupid as that seems to me and most of you.  The article said they refused to photo a gay marriage ceremony. 

If she is a private photographer then this is the same case as certain churches refusing to preform gay marriages.   

[Phoenix Dark]

Do your research.  Elane phototography is a company (not freelance!) that does photography for a number of things, and they explicitly stated that they didn't do same sex weddings.

I've been looking at her site for awhile and see nothing wrong, sorry. How is this not a private business or comparable to a freaking restaurant franchise? She should have the right to refuse to accept work for any reason she wishes. This is in no way similar to the other examples given in the OP

[Phoenix Dark]

That is required by law to operate under certain regulations...

[Howard Alan Treesong]

this thread made me dumber by osmosis

[Eric P]

this thread made me dumber by osmosis

yes but we call laugh at the 2m4m thing

[Howard Alan Treesong]

does that stand for 2 men 4 men or something else

[Eric P]

they didn't do their research

there is an antigay marriage group trying to organize two million marchers for hetronormative marriage and they called it "2M4M" as in 2 million 4 marriage

[Howard Alan Treesong]

yes but why are you laughing at 2M4M as an acronym, what are you "thinking" it stands for instead

help I am dumb

[Eric P]

personals classifications are typically

m4f
m4m
f4f

to call your anti-gay march 2M4M makes it look like you're trying to hook up a homosexual threesome.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

oh so the second 4 is a "for" got it

I was thinking it was a homosexual hexagon (or "sexagon")

[Eric P]

homosexual hexagon

hobosexual

hobonormative

[Madrun Badrun]

 

Do you like them in your mouth? 

[tehjaybo]

So you're a gay fish.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

I love the taste of breaded sea-kittens all over my throat