Supreme Court asks: could discrimination claim force female priests?

cna ^ | October 7, 2011 | Benjamin Mann

[NYer]

Catholic ping!

[SECURE AMERICA]

(The Justice Department holds that the Lutherans cannot fire Perich for complaining to the government even if church teaching forbids it.)

So separation of Church and State only applies when it works for the State??
The current Government is not a friend of the people, the Constitution, the military....

[NakedRampage]

Sepaeration of Church and State? Lately the libs have been using that exclusively in their own favor (freedom from religion, the liberal jerkwads all shriek)-- now its our turn.

Hands off the priesthood.

[oh8eleven]

Didn't the SC rule a few years that a private organization has the right to associate with whomever they please?
IIRC, it was the NAGs trying to gain membership to the Augusta National CC.

[PGR88]

I am convinced history is a big circle, and Christianity in the West will simply go right back to where it was in the second and third centuries in Rome.

There is nothing new under the Sun, after all.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Exactly. The liberals’ favorite “wall of separation” document, Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists explained that this kind of interference by the government was not allowed under the Bill of Rights. Contrary to popular belief, the courts are part of the government.

[Morgana]

oh brother!

[G Larry]

Perhaps the court could determine rocks should be bread and solve world hunger?

[Da Bilge Troll]

This is exactly what happens when government (including the courts) gets involved in strictly private matters. This is where the 1964 Civil Rights Act, for instance, went too far: government forcing integration is just as bad as segregation. Who I decide to pay or not pay is nobody else’s business.

[ViLaLuz]

Not until they compell female imams.

[RichyTea]

Is this potential enforcement pertain to only Catholics? Will it be inclusive and be applied in the same manner to all organizations? Such as: Buddhists, muslims, Amish. Certainly would like to hear input from all organizations that might be affected.

[oldbrowser]

They say the fourth-grade teacher lost her job for refusing to submit to an in-house dispute resolution process , thereby violating the church's interpretation of a biblical passage that discourages Christians from suing one another.

I think this has to be viewed from the perspective of setting a precedent for Sharia law in muslim organizations. If they are allowed to declare their in-house beliefs and rules as not subject to constitutional review, it could be a bad thing.

[the invisib1e hand]

Supreme Court asks: could discrimination claim force female priests?

Not in The Church. In the counterfeits? Anything goes.

[Campion]

“The government's general interest in eradicating discrimination in the workplace is simply not sufficient to justify changing the way that the Catholic Church chooses its priests, based on gender roles that are rooted in religious doctrine,” she said.

Wow. There you have it, in black and white. The Obama Administration thinks they have the legal right to outlaw the Catholic religion, all they lack is the "compelling governmental interest" (= grounds, motivation, justification) to do so.

For now.

[rzman21]

This is why secular ideologies need to be treated the way religions have come to be treated under the law. Otherwise, religious freedom will become a relic.

[aimhigh]

Jesus said that Christians will be persecuted in every nation. It’s coming soon, and the average church will dwindle from 300 to 15, just like it did in Russia. Time to prepare.

[Sacajaweau]

Jefferson is pretty much all over the place on just about every issue there was. Of course, the biggie was having slaves and condemning slavery at the same time....and also saying blacks were inferior.

think of him as a muddled mesh of thoughts but nevertheless, a great patriot.

Psst...The Federal government designated lots as reserved for Religious purposes. That was our land!!

[Chode]

feh...

[tanknetter]

I think, in looking at how this might result in discrimination suits filed by women who want to be Roman Catholic Priests, people aren't noticing that this has a MUCH wider scope. The key line from the article:

“It is a church that has decided to open its doors to the public to provide the socially beneficial service of educating children for a fee, in compliance with state compulsory education laws,” she said, drawing a sharp distinction between churches and religious ministries.

Ok, so the standard being put here is that when a church opens its doors to the public to provide a socially beneficial service it forfeits the religious exemption.

Apply that standard in other areas. Such as to hospitals and the "right" to an abortion. Under that standard religious hospitals might be forced to, down the road, perform abortions, right?