-----Original Message-----
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 1:20 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Catholic Charities Issue
Hmm; is there any data that would support this assertion? (I
take it that the assertion is limited to political violence.) I realize
that we're straying a bit from the law of government and religion, but
since this factual claim was made in the context of a discussion of a
Religion Clauses issue, it seems to me worthwhile to inquire into how
accurate this claim is.
Eugene
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Newsom Michael
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 10:16 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Catholic Charities Issue
Actually Glendon's point is debatable. In the United States, the
predominant pattern of violence is of violence visited by
traditionalists on progressives, not the other way around.
From: Rick Duncan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:16 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Catholic Charities Issue
Jeff Jacoby has an excellent column in today's Boston Globe here. And
here is a money quote:
Note well: Catholic Charities made no effort to block same-sex couples
from adopting. It asked no one to endorse its belief that homosexual
adoption is wrong. It wanted only to go on finding loving parents for
troubled children, without having to place any of those children in
homes it deemed unsuitable. Gay or lesbian couples seeking to adopt
would have remained free to do so through any other agency. In at least
one Massachusetts diocese, in fact, the standing Catholic Charities
policy had been to refer same-sex couples to other adoption agencies.
The church's request for a conscience clause should have been
unobjectionable, at least to anyone whose pri! ority is rescuing kids
from foster care. Those who spurned that request out of hand must
believe that adoption is designed primarily for the benefit of adults,
not children. The end of Catholic Charities' involvement in adoption may
suit the Human Rights Campaign. But it can only hurt the interests of
the damaged and vulnerable children for whom Catholic Charities has long
been a source of hope.
Is this a sign of things to come? In the name of nondiscrimination, will
more states force religious organizations to swallow their principles or
go out of business? Same-sex adoption is becoming increasingly common,
but it is still highly controversial. Millions of Americans would
readily agree that gay and lesbian couples can make loving parents, yet
insist nevertheless that kids are better off with loving parents of both
sexes. That is neither a radical view nor an intolerant one, but if the
kneecapping of Catholic Charities is any indication, it may soon be
forbidden.
''As much as one may wish to live and let live," Harvard Law professor
Mary Ann Glendon wrote in 2004, during the same-sex marriage debate in
Massachusetts, ''the experience in other countries reveals that once
these arrangements become law, there will be no live-and-let-live policy
for those who differ. Gay-marriage proponents use the language of
openness, tolerance, and diversity, yet one foreseeable effect of their
success will be to usher in an era of intolerance and discrimination . .
. Every person and every religion that disagrees will be labeled as
bigoted and openly discriminated against. The ax will fall most heavily
on religious persons and groups that don't go along. Religious
institutions will be hit with lawsuits if they refuse to compromise
their principles."
The ax fell on Catholic Charities just two years after those words were
written. Where will it! have fallen two years hence?
Mary Ann's point is well-taken. If A, then B.
I wish I had thought of that!
Rick Duncan
Welpton Professor of Law
University of Nebraska College of Law
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902
"When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad or
Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or
numbered." --The Prisoner
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
