The church has a "moral clause" in its contracts. The space cannot be rented out to certain types of events, such as the one that was denied here.
The business agreed to the contract, and in fact abode by the entirely legal contract. The fact that the business could not or chose not to find an alternate space to hold the event is what caused the harm.
The only way the church loses here is if they failed to enforce such a morals clause on other contracts.
Re: “The church has a “moral clause” in its contracts. The space cannot be rented out to certain types of events, such as the one that was denied here.“
In a sane world, you would be correct.
But, many pastors and churches have decided not to rent out the church building to anyone unless it is for a Christian religious purpose.
If you rent it out for any non-religious purpose, i.e. a wedding that doesn’t involve any members of the church or the pastor of that church, or some type of community club or activity, you’re church could be open to non-discrimination laws because non-religious activities are supposedly not covered by the church’s theological moral objections to same-sex marriages, transgender marriages, pro-homosexual groups, etc.
Yes, it’s crazy but that’s what’s coming. Also, what another poster said about his pastor getting rid of his “license to marry certificate” from the state is the coming trend among evangelical churches.
As Christians, we’re going to have to follow God’s laws rather than man’s and that may mean withdrawing from performing “state sanctioned” weddings or hosting community events. Such are the times we live.
But, we know how the story ends, so take courage. Even if the world kills us for Jesus’ sake and the sake of the Gospel, His truth endures and we will live with Him in Heaven.
This case is different than the other cases they cite briefly.
In the other cases the defendant businesses were breaking or appeared to be breaking local anti-discrimination laws
In this case NO broken law is cited and the LGBT organization is suing claiming that the church rules cost them $$$.
It sounds like a frivolous lawsuit against the church.