MN HousePosted on 03/04/2024 9:51:32 AM PST by SeekAndFind
MN House
Last year the Minnesota Human Rights Act was amended to include gender identity as one of the protected classes, meaning that it is illegal to discriminate based on gender identity.
Human rights laws in Minnesota have always allowed religious exemptions for such classifications for obvious reasons. Requiring a Mosque or a Catholic Church to employ flamboyantly gay people as teachers or prayer leaders is incompatible with religious freedom, and hence the First Amendment.
A group of left-wing Democrats lambasted people of faith Thursday in a Minnesota House of Representatives committee hearing. Blocking an amendment that would continue longstanding protections for religious institutions, Democrats rejected pleas from Minnesota’s religious community.
For decades, Minnesota statute has allowed religious organizations and associations to refrain from hiring individuals who do not match their faith traditions. For example, current state law ensures that private Christian schools cannot be forced to hire teachers who are gay, lesbian, Muslim, etc. However, Democrats in the Minnesota Legislature put a new term in state law during the 2023 session which complicates that: “gender identity.”
When Democrats introduced this term, state law was not adjusted to make sure religious institutions can still decline to hire someone whose “gender identity” is in opposition to their faith.
My friend and State Representative Harry Niska assumed that this was an oversight that could be rectified with a simple amendment.
Yeah, well, no. It turns out that the Democrats intended to force religious institutions to hire people from all 198,098 genders, or whatever the count is now, and they were happy to insult all the people who came to testify in favor of the amendment.
The Democrats have a simple explanation for why they chose not to include an exemption for religious communities: anybody who doesn't accept alphabet ideology is an awful bigot, totally wrong, and can go to hell.
It was no wild-eyed group of religious nuts who came to testify. They were representatives of the Archdiocese, the Islamic Center of Minnesota, the Missouri Synod of the Lutherans, the Jewish community, and others.
Representatives from Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, and Islamic institutions testified in favor of Rep. Niska’s amendment. Expressing a desire to retain their autonomy as religious groups, the testifiers asked legislators to support their fundamental rights to religious liberty.
“Parents naturally desire to have their children taught in an environment that aligns with their values and convictions,” said Dan Beckering, a school official with Southwest Christian High School in Chaska. “Faith-based institutions like my school cannot accomplish their mission if they do not have the autonomy to make governance and hiring decisions that are firmly aligned with their religious beliefs.”
Reverend Frederick Hinz, representing hundreds of congregations and schools aligned with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, said, “the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod has always considered it crucial that our leaders be deeply and personally committed to the mission and values of our church, living them out in their personal lives, including matters of sexual identity.”
Lawsuits are already being filed. The alphabet crowd wants to invade every religious school in Minnesota. The legislature is already considering several bills having to do with LGBTQ flags in schools and in government buildings, setting standards on where they shall be placed.
This will not stop any time soon. Put the Democrats in charge of government, and you put them in charge of every aspect of our lives.
Obey. Or else.
DEVS VVLT
My first thought as well, but of course they have no intention to go after anything but the churches.
The Squat will love this...................
The LCMS is mentioned in this report. Even the LCMS is under pressure to become more “relevant”. Google or search for “Ryan Turnipseed” on YouTube and you will see how the latest release of their religious documents has been infected with progressive nonsense.
So non-Muslims should apply for funding as a minority. Won’t work but why not?
HomoFascism on steroids.
The Supreme Court has already ruled on this
Of course that all went out the window when feminists forced themselves into male only clubs, etc.
And the excuse is always that if business is taking place or if money can be made doing something, then everyone needs to be able to participate.
It's ironic that the only time progressives support unfettered capitalism is when they want to infest otherwise good organizations with their evil ways.
Supreme Court already shot this down in a case from another state that wanted to force the Catholic Church on who they wanted them to hire.
SC ruled freedom of religious assembly means their right to hire those who agree with their faith is protected. So try as they may, it will be dead.
My first instinct is to defend the religious institutions against government intrusion, but in almost every major case over the years I’ve learned that the organization(s) targeted by the government don’t meet even a minimal standard as religious institutions. Catholic Charities is a perfect example of this.
Gender is a grammatical term.
Yes, I was always taught 3 genders in most languages:
masculine, feminine, and neuter.
Excuse me, but numerous church schools have been attacked in this way. A Catholic school in Massachusetts was ruled against years ago when they denied a cafeteria director job to an open, "married" homosexual.
Well ... as a Catholic in His Roman church ... we (and the Eastern churches) could learn a lot from the Muslims when it comes to no-nonsense, courage, critical mass, and legal consequences for such attacks on one’s faith.
As EVERYONE reading this knows. This will NOT apply to the muslims.
I’d have to see the specifics of that case to comment on it. Can you post a link to it?
What are you expecting, the Spanish Inquisition???
Just another reason to home school you children.
There are only two genders—male and female!
And the FEDERAL Constitution guarantees freedom of religion!
These creeps are asking for another unanimous Supreme Court opinion against them!
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.