DC Council votes for marriage, Catholic church blinks

[TommyO]

After threatening to yank their services to the poor in an effort to derail marriage equality in our nation's capitol, the Archdiocese of Washington tried to save face after the D.C. Council ignored the church's threats and voted for marriage equality.


Susan Gibbs, spokesperson for the archdiocese, issued the following statement in reaction to today's vote:

Today the District of Columbia joined a handful of states where legislatures or courts have redefined marriage to include persons of the same sex. Since this legislation was first introduced in October, the Archdiocese of Washington opposed the redefinition of marriage based on the core teaching of the Catholic Church that the complementarity of man and woman is intrinsic to the definition of marriage. However, understanding the City Council was committed to legalizing same sex marriages, the archdiocese advocated for a bill that would balance the Council’s interest in redefining marriage with the need to protect religious freedom. Regrettably, the bill did not strike that balance.
The Archdiocese of Washington and Catholic Charities are deeply committed to serving those in need, regardless of race, creed, gender, ethnic origin or sexual orientation. This commitment is integral to our Catholic faith and will remain unchanged into the future.

Religious organizations have long been eligible to provide social services in our nation’s capital and have not been excluded simply because of their religious character. This is because the choice of provider has focused on the ability to deliver services effectively and efficiently. We are committed to serving the needs of the poor and look forward to working in partnership with the District of Columbia consistent with the mission of the Catholic Church.

[babylonsister]

1. They sure changed their tune, didn't they. From Sunday...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=54324


The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington DC says they will cancel all their contracts to do charitable work with the city if the City Council legalizes gay marriage as they are expected to do.

The proposed D.C. law, expected to go before the council for a vote in the first week of December, would not require churches to perform same-sex weddings. But it would place churches and religious institutions under the auspices of the city's existing equality laws, which forbids employer discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

According to the {Washington} Post, the charity arm of the D.C. archdiocese serves around 68,000 people in the city with services ranging from homeless shelters to health clinics to adoption services. The church spends around $10 million a year on D.C. charity work, and provides a third of the city's homeless shelter beds.

All that could end if D.C. passes the gay marriage law, the church says.


Are you impressed?

[customerserviceguy]

2. They've probably shifted their focus

Congress gets to approve D.C.'s laws, I'd bet they've shifted their focus there. If you feel sold out on HCR, wait till you see how Congress votes on equal marriage.

[TommyO]

3. Congress gets to challenge laws passed by the City Council

No doubt some right-wing asshole will, but the chances of it coming to a vote in the full Congress are slim to none.

Thank you for pissing on our move forward in DC.

[marginlized]

4. Good for Them !!

and why shouldn't they stick to their principles? Good Works have always distinguished Catholics from the Sola Scriptura and "by faith alone" premise that is basic to most Protestants. If only we had a return of the Religious Left that gave us Catholic Worker Houses for example.

and not that it matters, but
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/09/18/gay-people-can-quote-the-bible-too

[GodlessBiker]

6. They *didn't* stick to them. They first said they would withdraw help...

to poor people if gay marriage was approved, now they have backed off.

They are stupid little turds without principle or conviction, only tradition.

Moreover, is "Marginlized" a real word?

[marginlized]

8. as much as GodlessBiker is.

[gaspee]

7. Horay for Bigots!

Marginlized - original and kind of ironic, eh?

Here's a newsflash - they should feel free to live by their principles, but they need to keep their pointy-headed hats out of government.

[marginlized]

9. Its not news, and I agree completely

As an atheist who really dislikes door to door Good Newsies as much as I dislike religious bigots voting my civil rights away, I also like to remind myself that at one time the religious left in this country was far more radical than ANYTHING being proposed by any lgbt advocate. Try the "Complex Marriage" of Oneida and John Humphrey Noyes, the Amana Colony Commune, etc.

So, I'm not trying to absolve bigotry, just saying its not religion per se.

[TommyO]

10. Good for them? Stick to their principles?

They caved like a house of cards when they realized that they were only hurting themselves and the poor people that they serve, the ones that they were ready to throw under the bus in furtherance of their anti-gay agenda.

[marginlized]

11. The Ahats at the top lost their play.

I'm just thinking there are probably a lot of people in those organizations who see serving the poor and other communities as the reason they do what they do, and that they probably resent their higher-ups playing politics as much as you and I do.

[GodlessBiker]

5. Nothing but medieval assholes pontificating here...move along.

The Church must have gone ape-shit when Spain legalized gay marriage.