Maryland Catholic Conference: spending taxpayer money is a religious liberty

Timothy Kincaid

August 24th, 2012

The language of Maryland’s ballot question is quite clear about how the marriage equality law will impact religious institutions:

“… protects clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs; affirms that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith; and provides that religious organizations and certain related entities are not required to provide goods, services, or benefits to an individual related to the celebration or promotion of marriage in violation of their religious beliefs.”

But the Maryland Catholic Conference disagrees: (Catholic Review)

However, the MCC says the law only purports to protect religious freedoms.

“According to the actual legislation, religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds are excluded from religious liberty protections. They are not exempt, and there are no protections for individuals,” the MCC said.

“Marylanders should not be fooled into thinking we can redefine marriage and still protect religious liberty,” it added.

Because “religious liberty” includes the liberty to tax non-Catholics and use the funds to push Catholic dogma. Yeah, I don’t think so.

For me the question isn’t whether religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds should be excluded from religious liberty protections, but why are there religious organizations that are receiving state or federal funds at all? “Charity” is not the same thing as spending tax dollars.

Priya Lynn

August 24th, 2012

“For me the question isn’t whether religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds should be excluded from religious liberty protections, but why are there religious organizations that are receiving state or federal funds at all? “Charity” is not the same thing as spending tax dollars.”.

I think the motivation is the same one that leads government to hire private sector outfits to do various jobs – “The government is incompetent and wasteful so we should get non-government organizations to do government work whenever possible.”.

Steve

August 24th, 2012

It’s called outsourcing. And religious organization constantly abuse it to attach strings (or better: chains) to their so-called “charity”

Mark F.

August 24th, 2012

He who pays the piper is entitled to call the tune. Turn down the money if you don’t like the music.

David Waite

August 24th, 2012

I’ve been asking this question and verbally making the “charity” observation for 55 years. Seeing you ask it makes me ask in amused amazement, “What’s in a name?”

“For me the question isn’t whether religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds should be excluded from religious liberty protections, but why are there religious organizations that are receiving state or federal funds at all? “Charity” is not the same thing as spending tax dollars.”

My insistence on an answer to this question has always caused my ‘progressive’ associates to label me an “extreme liberal” and other, less flattering designations, and caused some in my ethnic community to label me a traitor. Congratulations on escaping that unpleasant and lonely fate.

F Young

August 24th, 2012

“For me the question isn’t whether religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds should be excluded from religious liberty protections, but why are there religious organizations that are receiving state or federal funds at all?”

Absolutely agree!

When did the prohibition of the establishment of religion become the right of churches to be subsidized by government?

Steve

August 24th, 2012

By the way, Catholic Charities (the organization) is largely tax payer funded. They received almost 3 billion (yes, billion!) dollars in public money in 2010. That’s 62% of their revenue. In comparison, only 140 million (or 3%) came directly from the church. The rest were donations.

Richard Rush

August 24th, 2012

All this tax money going to religious organizations is just one reason that I always say, “the most profitable lesson that scammers-in-training will ever learn is that religion is their best friend.”

Hunter

August 25th, 2012

I have no objection to religious organizations receiving public money to support their social welfare efforts, but they must follow civil law, including non-discrimination laws. (As witness the Catholic Charities’ attempt to blackmail the state of Illinois over adoption by same-sex couples. The state said “Kiss your funding good-bye.” CC closed their adoption services and a number of other organizations — both religious and secular — stepped in immediately to fill the gap.)

It’s code: “religious liberty” means “religious supremacy.” There’s a basic principle of American society that is under assault here: believe what you will, but you can’t impose those beliefs on everyone else, especially not with government funding.

It strikes me that the hardest struggle in the past half-century or so has been to remove the religious assumptions from the law books. That’s really the root of the opposition to same-sex marriage: the laws inappropriately reflect religious dogma, and the more conservative religious elements are fighting tooth and nail to keep things just as they were in the seventeenth century.

Lord_Byron

August 25th, 2012

“For me the question isn’t whether religious organizations that accept any sort of state or federal funds should be excluded from religious liberty protections, but why are there religious organizations that are receiving state or federal funds at all? “Charity” is not the same thing as spending tax dollars.”

Because religious conservatives see it as their constitutional right to get tax payer money and think there should be no reason to deny them the money. Many GOP groups are pushing for such things as school vouchers that would allow families to launder money to religious organizations.

Plaintom

August 26th, 2012

Catholic Charities does seem to be a misnomer. Charities run by Catholics spending tax payers money would be more accurate.

CPT_Doom

August 26th, 2012

For the record, Catholic Charities, as I understand it, was set up as the secular, charitable arm of the Church explicitly to avoid church/state problems. It was supposed to be independent, so it could abide by local laws and the Church would not appear to be breaking it own rules. That is why fully 20% of the board of directors of Catholic Charities in Boston quit in protest when Sean O’Malley first tried this “religious liberty” crap there.

It is also fascinating to learn that adultery, fornication, heresy and blasphemy are no longer serious sins to the Catholic Church. After all, the same laws that protect gays and lesbians protect people who make those lifestyle choices, and the Church has NEVER complained. You see, the state “redefined” marriage when it allowed divorce decades ago, so that train has long left the station.

jerry

August 26th, 2012

When christian organizations cry the lament that they are being denied liberty I find that their complaint is that they are being denied the ability to discriminate against all others outside their own little sect of the main cult.

And for those who claim governments can not provide services effectively, they should check out the VA medical service.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Jubal

Another Temporary Hiatus

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1971: Minnesota Couple Stake Claim To First American Same-Sex Marriage

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1954: "Perverts Vanish" From Miami

Born On This Day, 1907: Evelyn Hooker

Born On This Day, 1925: Fr. John J. McNeill

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.