Gay activism made strides during 2011, with a handful of states having legalized gay marriage, and others granting civil unions that offer all the rights of marriage without the title.  The State of New York took a long time to finalize its gay marriage bill for legislation into law (without a public vote, as with all states that have legalized gay marriage), because it sought to protect the religious rights of churches and individuals.  New York wanted to be certain that religions would not have to perform gay marriages, if the religion considered homosexual behavior a sin.  Some say the legislation did not go far enough to protect religious rights, but of all the states that have legalized gay marriage, New York seemed to try the hardest.

Gay activists have long assured religious institutions that they could do what they please without effecting religious rights (or rites).  However, the foot is in the door, and already there are calls to fling the door wide open.  Who would have thought that it would happen so fast.

Howard Chua-Eoan, a writer for Time, had this to say:

In one very important way, gay marriage will not quite be marriage even in New York, even 30 days from now when the law goes into effect. That is because the psycho-sexual-financial-commercial-legal dramas that entangle the domestic lives of straight people often have another component: religion. And religious institutions have an exemption in the new law over accommodating gay people. It was key to the passage of the legislation.

Marriage without a church or temple wedding isn’t the real thing. Why can some people have all the bells and whistles in the church of their choice but not me? Of course, there have been and will be congregations and churches that allow gay men and lesbians to be married in their midst and to bless those unions. … but some rich and influential religious institutions are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now also rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights — no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere. [1]

In a rebuttal editorial Rev. R. Albert Mohler writes that homosexuality is shaking the foundations of the Christian Church.

He says some Christian denominations can “simply accommodate themselves” to the situation. “This is a route that evangelical Christians committed to the full authority of the Bible cannot take. … We cannot pretend as if we do not know that the Bible clearly teaches that all homosexual acts are sinful, as is all human sexual behavior outside the covenant of marriage.” [2]

When Mormon Apostle and lawyer Dallin H. Oaks gave a speech on the gay movement’s adverse affects on religious rights, everyone laughs at him, because they believe religious rights will never be hurt by gay marriage.  But he has spoken prophetically, and it only took months, not years, for his visions to manifest themselves in reality.

Updates

Recently, in August, 2011, a lesbian couple filed a lawsuit against a Vermont Inn that turned down their desire for a wedding and reception there.  The events planner working for the inn was evidently sympathetic to the couple, but the owners are Catholic, and are against gay marriage on religious grounds.  They are claiming that their religious rights would be trampled upon, should the lesbian couple win their lawsuit.  They also claim that they didn’t know about the reservation.    (Read more…)

*Gay adoption rights hit national stage.  “…there comes a point where right is right and core values can bend no further before shattering. … that line of demarcation is crossed when the government mandates that faith-based organizations contracted to serve foster children must choose between shutting down and arranging gay adoptions.”

The gay adoption issue came to a head at the end of 2011 in the state of Illinois.

“Catholic Charities in Illinois has served for more than 40 years as a major link in the state’s social service network for poor and neglected children. But now most of the Catholic Charities affiliates in Illinois are closing down rather than comply with a new requirement that says they can no longer receive state money if they turn away same-sex couples as potential foster care and adoptive parents. ” [3]

Adoptions through Catholic Charities in Massachusetts, and later Washington, D.C., were forced to close when gay marriage or civil unions became legal in those areas.   Catholic leaders have joined other religious leaders in accusing state governments of trampling their religious rights while extending tolerance to gays.  Gay activists ” frame the issue as a matter of civil rights, saying that Catholic Charities was using taxpayer money to discriminate against same-sex couples. ”

Catholics face battles on other issues, such as being forced to include birth control subsidies in the health insurance they offer church employees.   The Catholic Church also offers help to victims of sex-trafficking, but does not offer them birth control or abortion referrals.  The U.S. Government wants them to comply, but this is against Catholic doctrine.

The center of contention is the use of government money.  Gays say that if Catholic Charities uses state funds, it should comply with legislated gay rights.  The reply from Catholic Charities is thus:

“It’s true that the church doesn’t have a First Amendment right to have a government contract,”  said Anthony R. Picarello Jr., general counsel and associate general secretary of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops,  “but it does have a First Amendment right not to be excluded from a contract based on its religious beliefs.”

Catholic Charities is one of the nation’s most extensive social service networks, serving more than 10 million poor adults and children of many faiths across the country. It is made up of local affiliates that answer to local bishops and dioceses, but much of its revenue comes from the government. Catholic Charities affiliates received a total of nearly $2.9 billion a year from the government in 2010, about 62 percent of its annual revenue of $4.67 billion. Only 3 percent came from churches in the diocese (the rest came from in-kind contributions, investments, program fees and community donations).

The adoption services of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (sometimes erroneously called the “Mormon Church), have not been affected, because they do not receive any government funds.  Compared to the adoption services of the Catholic Church, however, the LDS services are small, and those served are Latter-day Saints.