Religion verses the Charter of Rights

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Burninator

You can file a lawsuit against anyone you want. However, as far as I know, I don't think anyone has been successful.

Manitoba Marriage Commissioner Ordered to Perform Gay 'Marriages' Fights in Court for Freedom of Religion

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06101904.html


This is exactly what people were afraid would happen. Being forced to perform such tasks. So much for freedom of religion.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Manitoba Marriage Commissioner Ordered to Perform Gay 'Marriages' Fights in Court for Freedom of Religion

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06101904.html


This is exactly what people were afraid would happen. Being forced to perform such tasks. So much for freedom of religion.

He's a marriage comissioner, an employee of the government, not a representative of a church. Government agents must apply the law equally to all citizens. Unlike religious organizations, they don't have the right to be discriminatory.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Well I don't have a problem with churches doing charity work per se, I do have a problem when they start trying to preach and propagandize for their religion at the same time. I don't want them having tax exemption to go help brainwash people into their religion.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Mormonism is a good case for this as in their early years they were openly racist towards darker skinned people. Their is also lots of racism in the Book of Mormon. Link. Nowadays most mormons are not racist but if someone wanted they could make case for racial discrimination if so inclined.

Interesting. But surely a court case involving Mormon racial discrimination would never arise. It would be so incredibly damaging to that church that the grand poobahs in Salt Lake City would no doubt never allow it to get that far.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

He's a marriage comissioner, an employee of the government, not a representative of a church. Government agents must apply the law equally to all citizens. Unlike religious organizations, they don't have the right to be discriminatory.

He has authority to provide marriage services....he is not an employee of the state no more than a Taxi driver is an employee of the city.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

He has authority to provide marriage services....he is not an employee of the state no more than a Taxi driver is an employee of the city.

The issue is partly analogous to the initial topic of this thread, interestingly.

He is not an employee of the state, but is licensed by it.
The Church is not part of the state, but receives a tax exemption from it.

[skins]

Originally Posted by photon

Just to argue from the other side, what if that same church that has a right to not perform homosexual weddings also wants to not perform weddings between black people?

Wouldn't the charter compel that church to do it? Or somehow sanction the church if they didn't? Or would the church be allowed to do that?

If the church isn't allowed to refuse to marry a black couple, but is allowed to refuse to marry a homosexual couple, doesn't that still mean homosexuals are being marginalized in society?

Honest question, I don't know the answer.

Thats definately a tough one. Many churches screen who is allowed to be married in their building. This may not be limited to sexual preference, it also includes religious backgrounds. I'm not sure if a catholic priest would be excited about a mormon couple being married in his church, or vise versa. To them, it's a holy place for sacred events, so they dont want things that contradict their beliefs happening inside. Is it discriminatory or is it your right to religious freedom of choice? I don't know either.

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Well I don't have a problem with churches doing charity work per se, I do have a problem when they start trying to preach and propagandize for their religion at the same time. I don't want them having tax exemption to go help brainwash people into their religion.

So you would prefer:

(A) Man ignores homeless man on the street

to

(B) Man helps a homeless man off the street and helps him get back on his feet, then says, "By the way, did you know Jesus loves you?"

??

What's wrong with (B)? It's not like these people are forcing their religion onto the people they're trying help. Last time I checked, people can choose whether to accept a religion or not.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

He has authority to provide marriage services....he is not an employee of the state no more than a Taxi driver is an employee of the city.

And a taxi driver who refuses to pick up a segment of the population based on religious grounds won't have his license for long. At least I hope that's the case.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by skins

Many churches screen who is allowed to be married in their building. This may not be limited to sexual preference, it also includes religious backgrounds.

Precisely. That's why all this talk about some religious figure/church being forced to perform same-sex marriages is just a smokescreen.

Religious institutions have the right to marry or not marry whoever they want. Same-sex marriage isn't going to change that. It hasn't changed that.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

And a taxi driver who refuses to pick up a segment of the population based on religious grounds won't have his license for long. At least I hope that's the case.

Didn't we have a discussion a while back about how cabbies were allowed to refuse service against people drinking?? Also I know cabbies can refuse services for other things such as someone with a disability and they have a guide dog.

[photon]

Originally Posted by skins

Thats definately a tough one. Many churches screen who is allowed to be married in their building. This may not be limited to sexual preference, it also includes religious backgrounds. I'm not sure if a catholic priest would be excited about a mormon couple being married in his church, or vise versa. To them, it's a holy place for sacred events, so they dont want things that contradict their beliefs happening inside. Is it discriminatory or is it your right to religious freedom of choice? I don't know either.

That's a good point. I know of churches that refused to marry someone because they engaged in pre-marital sex and didn't satisfy the church's requirement of obstaining for some arbitrary period of time.

Mind you those are still choices a person makes (choose to be Catholic or Mormon).

I agree not an easy question, I just wanted some idea of what reasoning a church would use to rationalize the position of on one hand supporting not allowing churches to refuse a marriage based on race, but on the other hand supporting allowing a church to refuse a marriage based on sexual preference. I guess the reasoning would be one is a sin and the other isn't, but things that are deemed sins seem to change over time so it's bascially arbitrary.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Religious institutions have the right to marry or not marry whoever they want. Same-sex marriage isn't going to change that. It hasn't changed that.

Well said. Not sure what the point of this whole debate is, when Church's do follow the Charter and do act within their own bounds.

As someone said earlier, it's kinda pointless to tax a non-profit organization. It's also immoral for the Government to step inside a religious organization and dictate what they can and cannot do within their own belief systems.*

*Of course certain senarios trancend this... such as sacraficing small children