Freedom of religion is safe and protected by our Enlightened Masters . . . so long as you offer the ceremonial pinch of infant to Caesar Paneros Moloch.

“The statement had particular significance for Levada’s former Archdiocese of San Francisco, whose Catholic Charities agency had been placing children for adoption with same-sex couples.”

Does anyone know if the Catholic Charities agency in San Francisco is still placing children for adoption with same-sex couples?

I’d have to think about whether a City resolution condemning a particular religious group is “prohibiting the free exercise” of that religion. It certainly is offensive and stupid. I wonder if the San Francisco City Board of Supervisors would ever issue a call for local Muslims to defy their religious teachings.

IIRC, the Catholic Charities adoption agency in Massachussetts shut itself down rather than place children with same-sex couples.

Is it the case that Catholic Charities adoption agencies may and do vary from diocese to diocese on this particular issue?

TUaD, looks like they eventually did cut all links:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/catholic_charities_in_san_francisco_severs_links_to_homosexual_adoptions/

It seems complicated: after the kerfuffle above, they didn’t get out of the adoption services area altogether like the Massachussetts agency; they weren’t directly placing children in same-sex homes but were paying the salaries of two workers involved with some kind of “web referral service” for a pro-gay adoption organisation, but in 2008 they finally severed all links.

According to Wikipedia, Catholic Charities is not one organisation as such but rather a network of (what seems to be) existing and new charitable organisations all over the U.S. (and indeed the world), so I imagine that explains why policies vary from diocese to diocese:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Charities

“Catholic Charities, USA (CCUSA), with headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, was founded in 1910 as the National Conference of Catholic Charities. More than 1,700 agencies, institutions and organizations make up the Catholic Charities network – including individual organizations of the dioceses, such as the Archdiocese of Chicago.”

To make it better again, there also seems to be “local, diocesan-associated Catholic Charities” so which body is doing what – you’re as wise as myself!

It would seem logical that if the government is prohibited from endorcing a religion it is likewise prohibited from condemning a religion.

Thanks Fuinseoig.

CH –

And “logic” has precisely what to do with the sodomite agenda or any other social cancer? I have read gay rights advocates who question whether the First Amendment shouldn’t be “re-visited” in the light of the sodomite need for approval.

Well, he didn’t say it exactly that way. But I looked for, and found, a notable dearth of coverage in the mainstream media, which is sort of sad: I was looking forward to their take on the Sacred Wall of Separation Between Church and State.

CH, the amendment says Congress shall make no law establishing religion nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This is now extended to states and their subdivisions. So while this is ill-advised and offensive, since it does not have the force of law it doesn’t directly interfere with religious freedom. If the Catholics can show that it had an inhibiting effect they could appeal.

What need to happen is for San Franciscans to have brain surgery and begin thinking clearly, which could result in the election of an intelligent City board.

I suppose that threats to withdraw funding from the Catholic Charities agencies unless the Archbishop “defied the Vatican” could be seen as interfering in the internal running of a denomination by a state body, though it is arguable.

There is no onus on the Board to fund these works through the Church instead of setting up their own ones, and equally no onus on the Church to seek State funding alone.

So yes, it’s just ignorant, boorish and nasty, but probably not interference with the work of the Church. Until they start bringing cases about “The Church refused to marry Bill and Ted but they’re willing to marry Tom and Jane! Discrimination which is illegal!” I don’t know if any such cases will ever be brought, but then again, I don’t discount the possibility of some flakey ex-Catholic wanting to make a splash about how the mean ol’ Church is responsible for repressing his self-esteem and some court being willing to hear that case.

If they actually withheld funding, there might be a case, but I haven’t read that they did.

I fully expect that Bill and Ted will eventually sue for an end against discrimination at the altar. The world has always fought the Church, and will continue to do so. Caesar has always demanded his pinch of incense, which (apparently), Catholic Charities of San Francisco has offered.

Those Brilliant Brights setting us poor trglodytes who refuse to defy nature and the purpose of natural law on the right path by force if necessary.

But then: anti-Catholicsm is nothing new.

That’s all folks! Game’s over. Final buzzer. Time to roll up the marble mosaic sidewalks in the Vatican, blow out the candles and lock the doors. The San Franhomo Council has spoken and hath found Catholicism to have come up short. The Roman Church has survived many storms over the centuries, but this looks like the Big Kahuna. Get thee to a nunnery, Benedict XVI!

Katherine,
I was not approving of the interpretation of the establishment clause to forbid governments to favor one religion over another, merely noting that if that is the ruling interpretation then it should logically apply to disfavoring a religion over another.

I realize that Logic has often very little to do with judicial thinking on religion and government, but on the odd occurences when judges are incline to think logically it helps to have a logical argument.

“The San Franhomo Council has spoken and hath found Catholicism to have come up short.”

“San Franhomo” – LOL!

It is no more establishing/prohibiting a state religion than allowing a spontaneous prayer at a high school football game…oh wait.

[...] THE MCJ– It’s like Glenn Reynolds always says. I’ll start to believe that global warming is a [...]