Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Law forces churches to hire homosexuals
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | January 22, 2005 | World Net Daily

Posted on 01/22/2005 8:26:13 AM PST by ViLaLuz

Illinois churches are protesting a new state law that bars them from "discriminating" against homosexuals, contending it robs Christians of their First Amendment freedoms.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed the bill into law yesterday amid a demonstration led by the Illinois Family Institute, or IFI, a non-profit group affiliated with Focus on the Family, Family Research Council and Alliance Defense Fund.

The measure adds "sexual orientation" to the state law that bars discrimination based on race, religion and similar traits in areas such as jobs and housing.

The bill was signed to loud cheers and a standing ovation from about 150 homosexual-rights supporters who see it as a human-rights issue. ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: activist; antichristian; attack; biblehaters; bloat; christian; church; churchandstate; cw2; cwii; discrimination; family; filth; firstamendment; freedom; freedomofassociation; gay; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexualwrongs; illinois; judicial; notinmychurch; pederasts; pedophiles; perversion; perverts; queers; religion; religiousliberty; rights; time2fight; uranusinvaders
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 next last
Homosexuality -- In your face, and you WILL accept it!
1 posted on 01/22/2005 8:26:13 AM PST by ViLaLuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: ViLaLuz

Alread posted, but yes, we have a problem with "separation of church and state"...and freedom of religion here. Just the leftist fringe whackos trying to force their perverted agendas onto our world via the judiciary, their normal modus operandi.


3 posted on 01/22/2005 8:28:42 AM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bullseye876

However big He wants it to be.


4 posted on 01/22/2005 8:30:29 AM PST by MKM1960
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Can't wait for the first pics of the state police hauling a priest out of his church in 'cuffs.


5 posted on 01/22/2005 8:31:28 AM PST by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Does the law apply to Muslims?


6 posted on 01/22/2005 8:31:28 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

I searched to see if this was previously posted, but nothing came up. Can you give me the link? Thanks.


7 posted on 01/22/2005 8:31:48 AM PST by ViLaLuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Sounds like a freedom of association issue, not a freedom of religion issue.


8 posted on 01/22/2005 8:32:02 AM PST by thoughtomator (Meet the new Abbas, same as the old Abbas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Good for an additional 500,000 Repub votes in 2006!


9 posted on 01/22/2005 8:32:32 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly

They are afraid of Muslims.


10 posted on 01/22/2005 8:33:06 AM PST by expatguy (http://laotze.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
Their attempts to sue God for calling homosexuality an abomination fell on deaf ears--they couldn't seem to get through--so they picked the next best target.
11 posted on 01/22/2005 8:34:24 AM PST by avenir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

The Civil Rights Act...chickens coming home to roost.


12 posted on 01/22/2005 8:35:20 AM PST by dAnconia (The government cannot grant rights,but it can protect them. Or violate them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

I never even thought of that until you just said it. The left separates church and state when they see convienent, but overlooks it when they need to push an agenda. It's getting really ridiculous.


13 posted on 01/22/2005 8:37:20 AM PST by kizzdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

"Law forces churches to hire homosexuals"

"The law can't be used to force people to violate their consciences."
...always the lie told by liberals/Democrats when they pass laws to COERCE
people to violate their consciences...


14 posted on 01/22/2005 8:37:39 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I predicted in my college Marketing class (Baylor University) in 1980 that corporations would one day be required to hire "token homosexuals." The professor was horrified by my comment. My prediction may soon come true! What a sick frickin' world we now live in!!!


15 posted on 01/22/2005 8:38:50 AM PST by PatriotBill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

In the name of equal rights, the incremental destruction of Christianity grinds ahead. You'll see gay activists using this law to battle Christian churches, but none will approach a mosque for a job. In the context of 'as applied' these laws are targeted only at Christians.


16 posted on 01/22/2005 8:39:40 AM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

I though it was all about the children?? What about protection for our youth??


17 posted on 01/22/2005 8:40:40 AM PST by television is just wrong (Our sympathies are misguided with illegal aliens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

It becomes a freedom of religion issue when government forces you to employ and pay those who do not accept the teachings of your religion.


18 posted on 01/22/2005 8:41:05 AM PST by jwpjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly
Does the law apply to Muslims?
Interesting question, which raises a couple of points:

1. Liberals traditionally absolve Muslims of all forms of misbehavior, including female subjugation, mutilation and murder.

2. Although publicly opposed to homosexuality, many Muslims (certainly Arab Muslims) grow up in a culture of secret but wide-spread boy-rape. So the fact is, the Mosques are already filled to the brim with practising homosexuals. The only question is, do they make that fact public.

19 posted on 01/22/2005 8:43:50 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

If there is a "separation of church and state" as liberals profess, how could the government have the right to force a church to do anything?


20 posted on 01/22/2005 8:45:31 AM PST by L98Fiero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
the filhy demoncrap party relies on the homo vote, and the governor is a filthy demoncrap.... Any questions?

this violates the First Amendment hugely,,,these churches need to take the homo promoting bastards to court...
21 posted on 01/22/2005 8:45:57 AM PST by aspiring.hillbilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
Homosexuality -- In your face, and you WILL accept it!

Yeah, TOTAL Barbara Streisand!

I'm sure the same judge will insist that heterosexuals have identical rights in working for homo organizations.

Right judge!!!

22 posted on 01/22/2005 8:46:00 AM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

P.S. By that I meant heterosexuals who are not supporters of homo lifestyles!!


23 posted on 01/22/2005 8:47:26 AM PST by Fruitbat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

The gates of hell shall not prevail against the body of Christ. Regardless of these immoral provisions, the true church will prevail---even if its property is confiscated because of the complaint of a sodomite.


24 posted on 01/22/2005 8:47:53 AM PST by bethelgrad (for God, country, the Marine Corps, and now the Navy Chaplain Corps OOH RAH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

I asked the question because if Mosques are not required to hire homosexuals for religious reasons, then Christian churches which are opposed to homosexuality on religious grounds shouldn't be required to hire homosexuals. On the principle that like things should be treated alike.


25 posted on 01/22/2005 8:49:11 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jwpjr

I don't see the freedom of religion angle as being that strong. This looks primarily like a case of coerced - and therefore unconstitutional - association to me.


26 posted on 01/22/2005 8:50:08 AM PST by thoughtomator (Meet the new Abbas, same as the old Abbas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: popdonnelly

Homosexuals won't try these Nazi tactics on the Muslims because they know they'd be going home with their head in a bag.


27 posted on 01/22/2005 8:51:31 AM PST by thoughtomator (Meet the new Abbas, same as the old Abbas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
If the issue is a freedom of association, then precedent is on the churches' side. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Boy Scouts when gay activists tried to use a similar law in NJ.
28 posted on 01/22/2005 8:56:01 AM PST by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
I really don't see how this can work. Our church extends a "divine call" for its pastors and teachers. This is done at a congregational meeting, where only men can vote. It is also a secret ballot. The results, I would say, are considered God's will. I don't see how a state government can dictate this.

Does anyone remember the outcome of the lawsuit against KFUO at Concordia, St Louis? It was regarding hiring practices.

29 posted on 01/22/2005 8:57:03 AM PST by stayathomemom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

30 posted on 01/22/2005 8:57:18 AM PST by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwpjr

That's true and the Supreme Court has sustained that very position. As I remember, the case involving the Boy Scouts arose because the New Jersey Commission on Human Rights had found that the Scouts illegally discriminated against homosexuals in refusing to allow them to become scout leaders. The Scouts' argument, accepted by the Supreme Court, was that they had a First Amendment-protected freedom of religion right not to hire homosexuals, because the religious teachings they impart as a part of the Scouts' creed prohibit homosexuality.


31 posted on 01/22/2005 8:57:26 AM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Watch now for Bible abridgement laws.


32 posted on 01/22/2005 8:59:37 AM PST by Fitzcarraldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool

Yeah to me that is the precedent.


33 posted on 01/22/2005 9:00:39 AM PST by thoughtomator (Meet the new Abbas, same as the old Abbas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
"Meet the new Abbas, same as the old Abbas"

Love the sig!

34 posted on 01/22/2005 9:01:26 AM PST by ViLaLuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: thoughtomator
Homosexuals won't try these Nazi tactics on the Muslims because they know they'd be going home with their head in a bag

They don't have to. Lot's of Muslims are already bisexual. Many use women only to procreate, but prefer same sex "partners".
36 posted on 01/22/2005 9:04:54 AM PST by demkicker (I'm Ra th er sick of Dan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

I'm sure these churches are essentially '501C-3 corporations' in which they receive numerous IRS granted tax benefits in exchange for 'compliance' with federal/state laws. These churches exchanged their sovereignty for certain 'privileges' and became subject to fedgov mandates and now they're paying the price.......that's what happens when you make the proverbial 'deal with the devil'.


37 posted on 01/22/2005 9:04:59 AM PST by american spirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

I am interested to see how this will be enforced.


38 posted on 01/22/2005 9:07:06 AM PST by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
Of course this is absolutely outrageous. But it merely takes an outrageous assault on personal freedom, which the Civil Rights laws on employment practices always were, to the final reduction to absurdity.

Will this finally wake people up to what happens when you allow the politically correct crowd to force their fanaticism on others? Who can say. I have been fighting this totalitarian mindset since I was a lad in High School, always expecting the reaction. It will come, or freedom will deteriorate even further, throughout what was once the "Land of the free, and the home of the brave."

For more on this type of legislation: Civil Rights vs. A Free Society

William Flax

39 posted on 01/22/2005 9:07:58 AM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

The heart of the matter.
"NOR PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF" is being violated here.
The left has for some time thake the cafeteria approach to the constitution.


40 posted on 01/22/2005 9:10:36 AM PST by chuckwalla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
I found it... "Churches barred from 'gay' discrimination." Somehow I copy and pasted a different title.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1325965/posts?page=1

41 posted on 01/22/2005 9:11:22 AM PST by ViLaLuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: american spirit

Did they give up their constitutional rights?


42 posted on 01/22/2005 9:14:04 AM PST by chuckwalla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Fitzcarraldo

Nice caption. God wrought his anger on Sodom. The good man Lot and family, were allowed to escape the horror with the understanding that they could not turn and watch the destruction. Lot's wife, curious to see the procedings of an infernal city was transformed into a pillar of salt.

The civil rights activists who are determined to push their "gay" agenda on all, need to take heed and research their Bible. God's wrath is not something I would like to witness.

Pray for our troops.


43 posted on 01/22/2005 9:19:03 AM PST by Mustng959 (In loving memory of those that gave their all to preserve our Freedoms!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

We are long past due going to war with the Left.


44 posted on 01/22/2005 9:20:56 AM PST by JoJo Gunn (More than two lawyers in any Country constitutes a terrorist organization. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
I expect several organizations to challenge this puppy in court.

This leaves the door wide open to sacreligious acts, to say the least.

45 posted on 01/22/2005 9:24:13 AM PST by Houmatt (Thank you, Terri, for showing me I had a heart. Because you broke it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

homosexual agenda ping


46 posted on 01/22/2005 9:24:48 AM PST by Houmatt (Thank you, Terri, for showing me I had a heart. Because you broke it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libstripper
I have the same problem when it comes to forcing landlords to rent to someone who openly violates the landlord's religious beliefs. If the property owner is an official, like a deacon or elder, in a church that teaches premarital or extra marital sex is wrong then why should the law require that person to rent to a couple that wants to live with each other without being married?
47 posted on 01/22/2005 9:26:08 AM PST by jwpjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: chuckwalla

When they "contracted" with the fedgov and became an 'artificial entity' (corporation) any constitutional rights they may have had were forfeited and replaced by (gov't granted)'civil rights'. As I said previously, by doing so they forfeited their sovereignty and now their 'civil rights' are at the mercy of bureaucrats working within the 'adminstrative / statutory system'.


48 posted on 01/22/2005 9:28:43 AM PST by american spirit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

just outrageous. HOwever, I fear there aren't enough people in Illinois who'll care about this enough to change the state's voting patterns in the next elections. If Kerry didn't bother them, why will this?

Good points about why liberals don't go after Muslims...they know Muslims will slit their throats, whereas Christians will not. This just goes to show liberals are huge cowards. Islam is far more opposed to the liberal agenda than Christianity is, but they attack Christians because we're an easy target that fights back in non-lethal ways. Liberals, deep down, aren't willing to die for their cause.


49 posted on 01/22/2005 9:29:00 AM PST by sassbox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator
I am probably about evenly split on this now that I think about it. Either way, I don't feel a church should be required to employ someone who scoffs at their beliefs! It would be like require a Jewish congregation to employ a child care worker who is not Jewish and insists on breaking out the fried ham every day at lunch time. Or requiring a health foods store that caters to vegetarians to employ someone who insists on sitting at the lunch counter every day and eating a big ol' rare hamburger patty.
50 posted on 01/22/2005 9:30:58 AM PST by jwpjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-136 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson