Gay Activists Pile the Hard Spin On Catholic Charities in D.C. to Cover Their Own Intolerance

huffington_post_catholic_smear

Realms of Inexplicable Evil

The Huffington Post today berated the Catholic Church as an ‘Inexplicably Evil Organization’. Why? Because it will soon be forced to stop providing services to the poor, homeless and needy on D.C.’s streets if same sex marriage legislation is passed.

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if same-sex marriage as it was currently worded, was passed.

The reaction?  Fix the law!  Provide religious protections!  Reject the normalization of homosexuality right?  No Sir, the spin is all on Catholic Charities for scrooging the poor out of spite.   See this from the Venerable Huffington Post:

“Yup, that’s right. If gay folk can marry, the Catholic church refuses to feed the homeless….Beyond being simply mean and intolerant, this is just a stupid strategy for the Catholic church to employ. It may be a symbol of religion, but the church is also a business that needs to expand its customer base, or it will become extinct like Greek polytheism or New Coke.” —Allison Kilkenny, Huffington Post

Yet unlike the characterization so eagerly given, the Catholic Church is not moving out of spite or political maneuver.  It’s a legal reality.  A legal reality, I might add, that was predicted was going to be a necessity if gay marriage was passed.

  • The issue came up in California during prop 8, and gay activists said:  “NO!  That would never happen.  You guys are fear mongering!”
  • The issue came up in Maine during Question 1, and gay activists said: “Lies!  Churches are exempt!  There are religious protections!”
  • The issue came up in Massachusetts and when no one stood to defend marriage laws, Catholic Charities, a public fixture for 100 years, was forced to close its doors.

Now we come to Washington D.C. and what are the gay activists saying now?

intolerance_disinformation

Not only are they forcing Catholic charity groups out of D.C., but they’re BLAMING the the Catholics for it!

“What ever happen to loving all of God’s creatures? I hope (and pray) they will see how unfair it would be to strip the needy of it’s services in an effort to stop gay marriage.  I was raised Catholic and was raised to be a compassionate Catholic and this action by the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington is beyond non-compassionate.” —TakePart.com

Unbelievable!  The D.C. City Council was warned by legal experts that the same sex marriage legislation they were considering lacked adequate protection for religious freedom. Rather than heeding these concerns the D.C. City Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary actually made the accommodations for religious freedom even more narrow than had been previously proposed.

A statement from the Archdiocese of Washington responded:

As a result, religious organizations and individuals are at risk of legal action for refusing to promote and support same-sex marriages in a host of settings where it would compromise their religious beliefs. This includes employee benefits, adoption services and even the use of a church hall for non-wedding events for same-sex married couples. Religious organizations such as Catholic Charities could be denied licenses or certification by the government, denied the right to offer adoption and foster care services, or no longer be able to partner with the city to provide social services for the needy.

“It is our concern that the committee’s narrowing of the religious exemption language will cause the government to discontinue our long partnership with them and open up the agency to litigation and the use of resources to defend our religious beliefs rather than serve the poor,” said Edward Orzechowski, president/CEO of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington. Catholic Charities serves 68,000 people in the city each year. The city’s 40 Catholic parishes operate another 93 social service programs to provide crucial services.

The Washington Post characterizes this as the Church giving the city an ultimatum, but we’re not talking ultimatums here.  We’re talking realities.

Susan Gibbs, a spokeswoman for the Archdiocese of Washington D.C. explained that it is the city that is giving the ultimatum.

“We are not threatening to walk out of the city,” Gibbs said. “The city is the one saying, ‘If you want to continue partnering with the city, then you cannot follow your faith teachings.’ “

Catholic Charities has served the D.C. poor for years.  Their services are needed.  Why the hard line?  The intolerance for religious belief? Why the hard spin?  Isn’t the whole reason we’re told gay couples want to marry is so they can be included?  Why push Catholic Charities out?

Bottom line: In the culture war, the progressive movement is about replacement, not inclusion.  It’s about winning no matter what the cost to freedom or humanity—and that is what is inexplicably evil.

—Beetle Blogger

Advertisements

10 Comments

  1. Delirious said,

    November 13, 2009 at 6:02 am

    I guess this is what you get when you bite the hand that feeds you.

  2. Choice and Accountability said,

    November 13, 2009 at 6:43 am

    Since the powers that be, in WA D.C. disdain the assistance of the Catholic Church’s humanitarian work, based on the Church’s religious beliefs, the government will easily and seamlessly, and cost-effectively step in to take care of the temporal needs of all 68,000. Because that’s what government does best.

    Right?

  3. B said,

    November 13, 2009 at 7:25 am

    The only reason that the Catholic Charities would be “forced” to close if the law passes is because they would violate the anti-discrimination part of the new law. Therefore, if they would not discriminate against same sex couples in their charities, NOT even in their churches, they would be able to continue to run their charities in D.C. Which does, in fact, make it the Catholic Church’s fault that they have to close their charities if the law passes.

  4. beetlebabee said,

    November 13, 2009 at 9:39 am

    Choice and A,
    I guess they will have to. Unfortunately for the people of D.C., government is never as efficient as regular people doing what they do out of love. Bureaucracy is a heartless animal.

  5. beetlebabee said,

    November 13, 2009 at 9:40 am

    B,
    Where were you on proposition 8 and Question 1? Were you one of the ones that said it wouldn’t affect the churches? Or did you know and just kept silent?

  6. Emissary said,

    November 13, 2009 at 11:12 am

    It’s interesting how quickly the argument changes from, “It won’t affect churches — don’t be such a fear-mongering bigot” to “It should affect churches because their doctrines are bigoted”.

  7. Chairm said,

    November 15, 2009 at 1:16 am

    Yes, Emissary, interesting and revealing.

    Gay activists who criticized Catholic Charities for adhering to the teachings of the Catholic Church insisted that the Government teach Catholics how to be better Catholics.

    Supposedly the way to do that is to impose anti-Catholic policies on Catholic agencies and Catholic citizens.

    And, they’d encourage government policies that would reach inside and promote schism in the Catholic Church. Catholics, they demand, should rebel against the leadership of the Church, including, of course, the Christ of Christianity.

    Catholic Charities was threatened, as it is now in DC, with being refused a license to arrange for adoptions even for Catholic women who’d relinquish their children rather than abort them.

    Oddly enough, in Massachusetts, there are plenty of pro-gay agencies and in fact several which cater specifically to gay and lesbian clients.

    The most active, and the earliest to mobilize, in the AIDS crisis in Massachusetts was … Catholic Charities. And that assistance was made possible more by the unpaid good works and the voluntary financial contributions of individuals than it was by state funding. Catholic Charities could have continued its adoption services without Government funding — but not without the license. That’s the truth.

    But these are the same zealots of gay identity politics who loudly insist on the seperation of church and state.

    And the same who now cry crocodile tears for orphans and mothers in crisis.

    Catholic Charities in Massachusetts was the most significant provider of adoption services for the most hard to place children. It did far more for children in need than the entire gay population of that state. Far more than the relatively minor group of gay persons who show an interest in adoption.

    The anti-Catholic policy of SSMers in Massachusetts cannot be disguised as pro-child and pro-liberty. On the other hand, Catholic Charities sought only to continue to provide services according to its higher standards — while meeting the basic standards that have long-established in the licensing of adoption agencies. To continue to license Catholic Charities would not have meant the end of gay adoptions in that state. But the SSMers sought the end of Catholic Charities adoption services, anyway.

    Totalitarian impulses are spurred by identity politics; and that’s a threat to our liberties — not only religious liberties but also freedom of conscience even for the indifferent or the irreligious amongst us. When identity politics is asserted as supreme to everything else, as per this example, then, expect that citizens will become wards of the state.

    This is the meaning of Ronald Reagan’s forewarning that we remember, always, that the People have a government, not the other way around. SSMers see it differently.

  8. whattheXblog said,

    December 10, 2009 at 8:02 am

    “What ever happen to loving all of God’s creatures? I hope (and pray) they will see how unfair it would be to strip the needy of it’s services in an effort to stop gay marriage.

    “What ever happen to loving all of God’s creatures?…wow, I couldn’t agree more!

    How unfair it is to strip the needy of its services…

    Tell me, who came up with idea of taking away those services? Was it the gays or was it the Catholic Church?

    Shame on the Catholic church for using homeless people as ammunition in the fight against SSM.

  9. CDH in DC said,

    December 15, 2009 at 1:55 pm

    Right on , whattheX. An institution that qualifies its giving certainly doesn’t reflect the tenants it promotes. I’d like to see gov’t funding revoked from Catholic Charities. Get your like-minded supporters to fund 65% of your annual budget. Not folks like me, who think charity should be charity FOR ALL. Is CC going to start screening the homeless to find out if they’re gay?

  10. Chairm said,

    December 15, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    On the other hand, CDH in DC,

    Catholic Charities is at the forefront of the often thankless work of caring for people afflicted with AIDS. They don’t screen for gayness, by the way. But it seems that the gay activists want the government to screen for Catholicism.

    What is the good in trying to impose anti-Catholic policies on Catholic organizations? Or pushing them out of doing good works?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: