D.C. Officials Seek Faulty Compromise With Catholic Charities Over Marriage Equality

The Washington Post reports that some of the D.C. Council members and Del. Eleanor Homes Norton are looking for a compromise with the Archdiocese of Washington to find a way to avoid ending the Catholic Charities in the District while at the same time have legal same-sex marriage. Archbishop Wuerl threatened to close the public services if marriage equality was legalized in the capital.

D.C. officials believe a way can be found for Catholic Charities to continue operating under their current contracts with the District while at the same time have their gay employees be treated equally as their straight counterparts if they were to get married.

"The rights of [gay] partners cannot be any different from similar situated couples, but with that said, if other jurisdictions have found a way to accommodate Catholic Charities, that would be very much be desired," said Norton, who wants to avoid Congressional intervention.

While Norton has been doing her best to avoid Congress from intervening (and we really don't want that - lately, it doesn't appear many in Congress has a spine to stand up to the Catholic Church - Stupack Amendment anyone?), marriage equality champions Council members David Catania and Phil Mendelson have written directly to the Archbishop of Washington. I obtained a copy of the letter and will post below.

D.C. Council Members Letter to Archbishop

Susan Gibbs, spokesperson for the Catholic Church, told the Washington Post that the church was pleased to see the council members "finally responding" to their concerns, but that it may not be enough to alleviate the Church's fears of having to end their contracts and shut down public services.

I myself would be sad if the Church felt the need to close these services because they do in fact help many homeless and poor people get by day-to-day. However, I am not satisfied with the proposal given by council members because the solution they offer has to do with domestic partnerships and not necessarily with marriage (though I applaud the effort). And in this case particularly, you will be yet again relegating same-sex couples to a lesser status, but you would also have to do this to employed straight couples. Not very good.

On top of this, the fact that's really itching at the back of my brain is that the Catholic Church has declared full on war with marriage equality throughout the nation.

Back in August I reported on the Church's plan to put aside $2 million to fight marriage equality nationwide, even letting several parishes in Maine close rather than to give up this fight.

Yet this same Church cries foul when they're held to the same standards as any other business receiving public funds. They say they shouldn't be forced to follow discrimination laws because of their beliefs, and if they choose not to receive public funds anymore so they can continue to discriminate, then they'll be forced to close because they won't have enough money to function.

I say, Why not dip into the marriage war chest? Function as a private institution. Instead of using the $2 million to fight fellow citizens' rights, why not use it to do the good work you're already doing and let people live their lives as they see fit?

I'd have more respect for the Church if they did this than if they acknowledged my relationship in a compromised form. Don't want to acknowledge a gay employees' marriage? Don't hire gay employees! As a religious institution, they're exempt (in many circumstances) and able to do so.

As long as they're not receiving government funds.

Ah, but there's the rub. It's about the money.

Gibbs, the church spokesperson, seems to agree with me about the domestic partnership angle of the council members' proposal. She said that Archbishop Wuerl was reviewing the council members' letter, but church staffers wonder how the council can equate domestic partnership in San Francisco with same-sex marriage. See, even the church knows the two categories are not equal. She noted that the District has a domestic partnership law but that the Church is not covered by it.

And the dance continues.

Catholic Church Threatens to End All Its Public Services if D.C. Passes Marriage Equality

This comes as no surprise to me.

The Catholic Church in Washington D.C. has threatened to pull out of all social services in the District if the City Council moves forward with the currently proposed marriage bill. Their concerns stem from the fact that though they will be exempt from having to provide wedding day services, they will be forced to recognize the relationships afterward through employee spousal benefits and other consequences of marriage equality.

Such a threat if followed through could affect tens of thousands of residents, reports the Washington Post, because of the assistance the church provides for adoption, homelessness and health care.

"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

However, it appears to me that the Church's biggest problem is with existing legislation, the Human Rights Act, which demands that discrimination against gays and lesbians not be tolerated.

The church is not the dominant provider in the district for its charitable services, though if they pull out, it will have an impact. But WaPo is saying that the church's influence is limited, with the marriage bill's sponsor, councilmember David Catania, who claims to have been a big supporter of their charitable work, says he'd rather part ways with the Church than to give into their threats.

"If they find living under our laws so oppressive that they can no longer take city resources, the city will have to find an alternative partner to step in to fill the shoes," Catania said. He also told WaPo that the Catholic Charities was involved in only six of the 102 city-sponsored adoptions last year.

Marriage equality advocates are telling the paper that this is the first that such a heated falling out has occurred over a marriage bill and public services.

But this has been a long-time coming. Who doesn't remember the Yes on 1 campaign crying foul that a Catholic adoption agency in Massachusetts, which was receiving government funds, chose to shut down instead helping same-sex couples adopt?

It's the same thing here. What the church is really objecting to is LGBT citizens receiving equality and as a result, more standing in society. This forces the church to deal with them publicly instead of keeping the status quo, which is acting like the LGBT population doesn't exist (unless of course to use us as a scapegoat for pedophile priests).

The crux of the problem is that the existing Human Rights Act, which is separate from the marriage bill, already demands that the church offer its public services to all residents if these public services are receiving public money. I've already objected to the fact that the current religious exemptions in the marriage bill violate the Human Rights Act, but now that the church is demanding even more coddling and special treatment, they're beyond reproach.

Let's face it. The Catholic Church will soon argue itself into non-relevance, exposing its hypocrisy to the point where society will have no interest in any of the actual good that it performs. Which is a shame because Jesus ordered that they feed the hungry and shelter the poor, something that the Church is good at doing. Jesus didn't say anything about gays or lesbians. Unfortunately, the Church has interpreted that as persecute and then ignore them.

So much for charity.

RELATED:

• WaPo - D.C. marriage bill draws eyes across the region
• Catholic Church Ready to Throw Homeless Under Bus in Order to Stop Gay Marriage

VIDEO: NOM's Brian Brown Faces D.C. Councilman and Marriage Equality Bill Sponsor David Catania

At yesterday's public hearing on D.C.'s marriage equality bill, Councilman and lead sponsor of the bill David Catania faced down the National Organization for Marriage Executive Director Brian Brown.


(video via NGBlog)

Washington DC Could Have Marriage Equality by Thanksgiving

This coming Tuesday DC Council member David Catania will finally propose his oft-reported marriage equality bill which would legalize same-sex marriage within the District.

In May the District's Council voted to recognize legal same-sex marriages performed outside its borders and the new law overcame stark opposition when a federal judge ruled against a public referendum. A public vote would violate the district's Human Rights Act.

The Washington Post:

Catania made his announcement before 150 gay rights activists gathered in Shaw for a rally featuring the Rev. Eric P. Lee, president of the Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

"We are going to do it now," Catania told the crowd. "We are going to do it now, not for ourselves, but for the young people who are 20 years-old, 16-years-old, 13-years-old."

According to a copy of the bill, the city code would be changed to state "marriage is the legally recognized union of two people" and "any person ... may marry any other eligible person regardless of gender."

Catania's bill, which states religious organizations and officials have the right not to participate in same-sex marriages, is expected to pass the council easily when it comes up for a vote around Thanksgiving. Ten of 13 council members will co-introduce Catania's bill Tuesday, and Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) has pledged to sign it.

However, the bill would have to get past the U.S. Congress first which, under the Home Rule, has jurisdiction over bills in the District. Yet reports indicate that, like the marriage recognition bill, Congress won't act to fight it.

Catania has been in touch with the White House regarding the bill and states that their response "has been very good."

The amazing Rev. Eric Lee, President of the Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who has faced losing his job for his staunch support for marriage equality, visited the District. There he gave a sermon comparing the marriage equality battle to the struggle for voting rights in the District.

"It's taxation without representation," he said. "That's an issue here in D.C., isn't it?"

According to D.C. for Marriage, Lee continued:

Lee outlined 5 basic tenets for the marriage equality movement to follow: "education, for the purpose of organization, for the purpose of mobilization, for the purpose of agitation, for the purpose of transformation... in societal attitudes" toward LGBT citizens and same-sex relationships. In rebuttal to marriage opponents who seek to fracture DC along racial and religious lines, Lee invoked the powerful words of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr: "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Lee offered the perfect segue for pending marriage equality legislation with a rousing declaration that "the burden of discrimination is on those who are discriminating... Make the oppressor defend their discrimination! Make them look you in the eye. Make them engage you with respect."

Equally strong opponents, such as the Bishop Harry Jackson and the National Organization for Marriage, whose headquarters are in D.C., have vowed to fight the measure.

Next door, Maryland's Attorney General Douglas Gansler is expected to rule soon on the state's law and whether or not it allow the state to recognize legal same-sex marriage performed outside its borders. If he rules in favor, which many expect, many gay and lesbian couples may end up flocking to the capital to exchange vows.

Another Victory Today: D.C. Will Recognize Same-Sex Marriages

UTF earlier reported about the efforts being made to bring same-sex marriage to the United State's Capitol.

This effort just received a major boost today.

The D.C. Council voted today 12-0 to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, on the same day that Vermont became the fourth state to legalize same-sex unions.

Though domestic partnerships are already legal and those who move to the city with partnerships from other parts of the country are recognized, today's approved legislation explicitly recognizes them as married couples. This is a huge milestone.

And it puts marriage equality right at the White House's doorstep.

According to the Washington Post, "The unanimous vote sets the stage for future debate on legalizing same-sex marriage in the District and a clash with Congress, which approves the city's laws under Home Rule. The council is expected to take a final vote on the legislation next month."

Gay council member David A. Catania (I-At Large) believes the council will soon take up a bill to legalize same-sex marriage for the District itself.

"It's no secret that I have been working on legislation that would take us further," he said. "This is the march toward human rights and equality. This is not the march toward special rights. This is the equal march and that march is coming here."

Is Same-Sex Marriage Headed to DC?

According to the Washington Blade, that could be a possibility thanks to D.C. Council member David Catania.

Local, gay-supportive religious leaders say an email has been circulating that David Catania is testing the waters for support if he were to introduce a same-sex marriage bill.

The circulating e-mail, sent March 19 by Rabbi Robert Saks of D.C.’s gay synagogue Bet Mishpachah, says, “Rev. John Wimberly and I met yesterday with Councilman David Catania. He is preparing to introduce legislation around April 7 which would legalize same-sex marriages in D.C.

“I am turning to you to recruit your assistance, and to ask for your guidance with the names of other ministers in the Christian community who might support this effort," Saks says in the e-mail. Saks wasn't available to the Blade for comment.

According to Catania's spokesperson, the council members has made any definitive decisions about the bill yet.