Catholic Charities, which is happy to take $2.8 billion a year from the government, and which is run by a church worth God knows how much money (have you ever seen the Vatican?), now claims that because of the gay they can no longer afford to help parentless children find homes in three towns in Illinois.
Not exactly true. The state of Illinois, which gives Catholic Charities millions each year, simply said that the charity has to obey Illinois non-discrimination laws when spending Illinois taxpayer money. Catholic Charities would have none of that. So rather than simply stop discriminating against people, Catholic Charities figured it would be better to hurt gays and children.
Now mind you, this organization takes $2.8 billion a year from the government, yet now they’re claiming poverty. Have you been to the Vatican? The wealth is immeasurable. They could sell a Michelangelo and fund a ton of adoption centers. But more importantly, Catholic Charities chose to hurt children. You’d think the bottom line of any church would be to do no harm to children. But in this case, in this church, the bottom line is hatred towards gays and lesbians. And if it means hurting children along the way, then that’s collateral damage the church is willing to accept.
Then again, we already knew that the Catholic Church didn’t exactly put the best interests of children at the top of their list.
What is interesting to me, however, is how Catholic Charities is trying to have it both ways here. The government doesn’t fund religions. It funds charities. So how is it that Catholic Charities is trying to claim that they’re not a church when taking $2.8bn from the government, but they are a church and deserve a church’s exemption from civil rights laws when it comes discriminating against gays? Either they are a church and they shouldn’t be funded by taxpayers (where’s the $2.8bn for my church?) or they’re not a church and thus aren’t eligible for a church exemption from civil rights laws.
So which one is it?