Will a religious institution lose tax-exempt status for refusing to marry a same-sex couple?

Los Angles Times ^ | June 26, 2015 | David Lauter

[artichokegrower]

A hot question in conservative circles for months gained steam Friday with the Supreme Court's landmark decision on same-sex marriage. The concern: Could a church-related institution, such as a college, lose its tax exemption for refusing to give equal treatment to same-sex couples?

[Mike Darancette]

The AME Church in Charleston SC. You don’t really think that those substantial Christian folks would be for that do you?

[Zathras]

YES.
This is why the Pope is pushing Global Warming.
They think its a payoff to keep the Gay Mafia off their back.
It won’t work.

[Alberta's Child]

Will a religious institution lose tax-exempt status for refusing to marry a same-sex couple?

The short answer is: No.

There are religious groups in this country that already do things that would get anyone else in trouble with the law. There are Orthodox Jewish groups in New York, for example, that run regular commuter buses to the city that are segregated by gender (the women and the men aren't allowed to look at each other). This may jeopardize any public funding they might get for this bus service, but it doesn't put them on the wrong side of the law in any way.

[Alberta's Child]

I would take it one step further. Once religious institutions get out of the business of giving out civil marriage licenses, there's really no reason for a married couple who are members of that organization to even bother getting a marriage license.

The whole idea of ANYONE -- let alone a religious group -- getting a "marriage license" is absolutely offensive in a free country.

[Alberta's Child]

Religious schools would no longer be permitted to discriminate against same sex married couples when hiring, firing, granting housing, offering benefits, and selecting admissions.

Of course they can. In fact, religious schools that do this sort of thing actually stand up better under legal scrutiny as a truly religious institution. It's the half-@ssed frauds like Catholic Charities who would be out of luck here ... because they call themselves a "religious organization" even though they have no religious qualifications for their leadership positions, do not focus their activities on religious instruction or proselytization in any way, and (consequently) get more than 60% of their funding from the government.

[Alberta's Child]

If I were doing it over again I would ask the priest to do a sacramental only marriage.

There was a time when I thought this might be a course of action pursued by a few brave, principled married couples.

Now I'm convinced that it's actually going to become the standard practice among religious people.

Give it a decade or so, and the only people who even bother with a "civil marriage" will be the freaks who can't really get married anyway.

[lastchance]

I believe you will be shown to be mistaken. Think of “Bob Jones University”

[Alberta's Child]

From what I understand, the big difference in that case was that there is no religious basis for a policy of racial discrimination.

I predict that the U.S. legal system will never go down the road of using homosexual rights as a weapon against religious organizations -- mainly because they are likely to find that Muslims would be among the strongest opponents.

If anything, I think yesterday's court decision will end up paving the way for Muslims to get legal recognition for polygamy -- on both religious and civil grounds.

[biff]

I think it will be the modern test of the true Christianity of the churches, ministers and priests. Will they be willing to go to jail over refusing to marry a couple of queers? Will the churches stand their ground when it comes to the teachings of the Bible and risk closure?

Or will they go along to get along?

[kingu]

I'm unsure where it goes from here. I have seen so many weddings of the elderly recently, and I have to ask myself, is there all that much difference between two 70 year olds and Tom and Tom? The exceptional is quickly becoming common place, and the moral authority that should come from the church is becoming mired in exception after exception.

Even the Pope is choosing to bring forward into public discussion those rare exceptions where separation is not only accepted, but encouraged.

Too much exception is running the rule. Too many ‘feel good’ choices are being made at the expense of doctrine. So do I think that many churches will welcome these abominations with open arms? Yeah, probably will. And more people will turn away from the temples of God in disgust.

Just can't wait until the gays go back against the Catholic church and demand more homosexual priests. It worked out OH so well last time...

[JimRed]

They can refuse to marry a couple who do not attend a pre-marriage counseling session. How many homosexuals would be willing to sit through chapter and verse about why their perversion is wrong?

[JimRed]

All that will be left is the mosques.

A target rich environment.

[JimRed]

Married, filing jointly on your income tax return.

Do the words "marriage penalty" still apply?

[abb]

Yes, that situation turns up when there is a big differential in incomes between spouses. Usually married, filing jointly results in a lower tax bill. So if a couple says we won’t get a marriage license from the state, then more than likely it will cost them come tax time.