USCCB decries Obama's LGBT executive order as 'unprecedented and extreme' [CWN]

Referring to the “irrefutable rightness of your cause,” President Barack Obama signed an executive order banning federal employment discrimination against transgendered persons and …

More…

Typical.

How could Catholics who voted for him not know that this is what they would get?

I think we need to demand the same rights that all these groups seem to feel entitled to. The same laws should apply to all and so if I as a Catholic cannot in good conscience fund immorality or offer my services to people in lifestyles that are diametrically opposed to my faith then no one should have the power to coerce me to do so.

Perhaps the bishops should have listened when they were warned in 2008. Lie down with dogs, you get fleas. It’s ridiculous to complain now when he is doing exactly what was warned about. He is an enemy of the Church, and bishops should have treated him as such, and the least they can do is to start doing so now.

Good point, Michael. :thumbsup:

Jon

Maybe said “Catholics” knew.

Are you supporting the idea that transgendered people SHOULD be discriminated against when it comes to employment?

That is should be harder for them to get a job because of their particular “sin”

Subject them to poverty for it?

I hope no one is peeking in your windows and deciding that your “sin” should be the next criteria to deny someone a job.

Missing Mass is a mortal sin, should people who miss Mass no longer be considered for government jobs? Or people who fornicate or masturbate, or use AFBC?

Which rights are you being denied?

If all non-Catholics felt it was OK to discriminate against Catholics do you think the Government should step up and say that was unconstitutional? There are many for whom Catholicism is opposed to their faith.

These are genuine questions, just seeking answers, I am not making assumptions or accusations.

A good question to ask any candidates is - will they rescind these executive orders?

They have no reason to declare it to anyone. Who would know unless they tell? If they do it may be to advance an agenda.

A wonderful strawman, if I may say so. From my understanding as a non-Catholic, the CC is quite clear that people should not be discriminated against in employment. At the same time, the Church reserves for itself the right to act in accordance to its beliefs. Example: only males can be ordained.

Further, the Catholic Church does exceptional work in helping those in poverty, so even framing it as a question is disingenuous.

Jon

not a straw man or disingenuous. I asked questions for clarification and I appreciate your responses. It helps me understand the discussion.

I did not come here to argue or disrupt, sometimes people assume any post that doesn’t say “yeah man, right on” is looking for trouble.

sometimes people are actually seeking to understand.

In addition to John NC’s response, it should be pointed out that nowhere does the USCCB doc say such a thing. It actually decries such unjust discrimination.

Yes, in some cases. For example, it should be acceptable not to have some guy who says he is a girl (or visa versa) admitted as a seminarian, or perhaps even as a teacher in some situations. As this presidential dictate is given, without religious exemption, Catholic Churches should no longer be able to do anything with federal funds, as it applies to contractors as well as federal jobs. If the dictate had applied only to federal jobs under control of the President, then that would have been a legitimate exercise of presidential powers. If there had been a religious exemption, then that would have been a legitimate law (which is under the power of Congress to enact). The President not only discriminates against people of faith, he also oversteps his Constitutional power, which is why the Supreme Court has been needed to thwart some of his power grabs.

It’s my understanding, for the first part of that, that Catholics have an absolute right to determine who can be a member of their clergy, under the First Amendment, according to a court case, religious exemption or not.

So far. The current regime has shown a particular proclivity for trying to overrule/undermine 1st amendment principles, especially regarding religious liberty, and progressives are not known for being tolerant of exceptions.

Jon

They do, which is why it is so surprising to see a president who is supposedly trained in law not allow a religious exemption. It almost seems as if his disdain for God and people of faith is greater than his respect for the Constitution.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.