# Mass. Priests Punished for non-support of SSM Ban **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 29, 2005, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084 "2005-09-29T20:25:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/1 "2005-09-29T20:25:07Z")
[Priest pulled after refusing to support anti-gay marriage push](http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2005/09/29/priest_pulled_from_mass_after_refusing_to_support_anti_gay_marriage_push/) > [@](#): > > The move came after Lange and his associate pastor, the Rev. Stephen Labaire, posted an item in the Sept. 11 church bulletin stating their opposition to a proposed Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The state’s four Catholic bishops are leading a signature drive to get the amendment on a ballot in the 2008 election. Why can’t these Bishops and other Church folk let us alone? Why can’t they let the secular be secular? Live and let live? I’m sure someone will defend the actions of the Bishop and say the Church has a right to its rules. But these Bishops aren’t trying to only rule their churches. They want to rule the state, too. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/2 "2005-09-29T20:37:59Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > Why can’t these Bishops and other Church folk let us alone? Why can’t they let the secular be secular? Live and let live? Because they believe that same sex marriage is morally wrong and bad for society, so it would be evil for them to not fight it. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/3 "2005-09-29T21:02:13Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > Because they believe that same sex marriage is morally wrong and bad for society, so it would be evil for them to not fight it. Yeah…too bad they didn’t think pedophilia was morally wrong and bad for society, huh? Buncha fucking hypocrites… ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/4 "2005-09-29T21:15:38Z")
I’m not entirely sure what’s being pitted here. **Homebrew** , are you mad at the bishops for trying to shape state law to conform to the teachings of their particular religion, or for punishing those priests who dared to disagree with them? ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/5 "2005-09-29T21:21:38Z")
> [@Robot Arm](#): > > I’m not entirely sure what’s being pitted here. **Homebrew** , are you mad at the bishops for trying to shape state law to conform to the teachings of their particular religion, or for punishing those priests who dared to disagree with them? It may be splitting hairs, but the priest wasn’t deviating from the church on a moral issue, but a political one. He never said SSM’s are A-OK and sanctioned by God. He simply refused to support a petition drive against SSM, and was subsequently punished for it. It’s one thing to discipline a priest who deviates from religious teachings, but this was a policy issue, implying that you can only be a good Catholic if you vote a certain way. Despicable. ---
**Author:** ![CynicalGabe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3e96dc/32.png) [@CynicalGabe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CynicalGabe)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/6 "2005-09-29T21:28:12Z")
Boy, its a good thing that Jesus guy never said anything against judging others… :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/7 "2005-09-29T21:30:17Z")
Exactly **ArchiveGuy**. Preach it all you want. I don’t care if you _think_ I’m a horrible sinner. But I’m a citizen of this nation and I deserve all the privledges, rights and responsibilities that entails. Trying to use your religion to limit my rights is wrong. I don’t see how thinking something is morally wrong, **Captain** , gives them any power to infringe upon my rights. I think their whole system is morally wrong and quite harmful for society; but I’m not trying to outlaw it. I’ll thank them to return the favor. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/8 "2005-09-30T01:09:28Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > But I’m a citizen of this nation and I deserve all the privledges, rights and responsibilities that entails. And so are they. Some of those privileges and rights involve the right to speak one’s mind about the issues and matters of the day, and to set church policy as they see fit. You don’t have to like it or agree with it to recognize that they were well within their rights here. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that religious people could have no say in national policy. Nowhere in American history is such a ban evident. One of our greatest national heroes was an ordained and practicing Baptist minister, it should be pointed out. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/9 "2005-09-30T01:31:39Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > You don’t have to like it or agree with it to recognize that they were well within their rights here. Who said they weren’t “within their rights”? The question is not “should the church be legally allowed to do this?”, it’s “is the church being a dick?” ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/10 "2005-09-30T02:32:55Z")
> [@Robot Arm](#): > > I’m not entirely sure what’s being pitted here. **Homebrew** , are you mad at the bishops for trying to shape state law to conform to the teachings of their particular religion, or for punishing those priests who dared to disagree with them? How about both? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/11 "2005-09-30T03:38:49Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > I don’t see how thinking something is morally wrong, **Captain** , gives them any power to infringe upon my rights. I think their whole system is morally wrong and quite harmful for society; but I’m not trying to outlaw it. I’ll thank them to return the favor. Because you and they have different views of what the role of goverment should be. You think that the role of government should be to allow people to have maximum freedom so long as they don’t hurt anyone else, and not to judge between different moral or world views. They think the role of government should be to encourage a specific moral worldview and specific social and societal values. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/12 "2005-09-30T03:49:14Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > Because you and they have different views of what the role of goverment should be. You think that the role of government should be to allow people to have maximum freedom so long as they don’t hurt anyone else, and not to judge between different moral or world views. They think the role of government should be to encourage a specific moral worldview and specific social and societal values. In other words, the Catholic Church thinks the role of the government is to enforce Catholic doctrine? Anyone with any sense, Catholics included, ought to be revolted by the idea. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/13 "2005-09-30T04:30:05Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > The question is not “should the church be legally allowed to do this?”, it’s “is the church being a dick?” If you knew how tempted I am to steal that as a sig-line, you’d hide it. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 9:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/14 "2005-09-30T09:51:46Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > In other words, the Catholic Church thinks the role of the government is to enforce Catholic doctrine? Anyone with any sense, Catholics included, ought to be revolted by the idea. That isn’t what I see happening. It seems more appropriate to describe this as individual Catholics and the Church having an opinion about what civil marriage ought to be. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/15 "2005-09-30T14:48:32Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > That isn’t what I see happening. It seems more appropriate to describe this as individual Catholics and the Church having an opinion about what civil marriage ought to be. Look, the Church through its bishops acting in their official capacity are directly lobbying politicians in opposition of gay marriage. If they cannot articulate reasons for opposing civil same-sex marriages that are not rooted in Catholic doctrine, they are absolutely attempting to have the state enforce church policy. And yet, their only argument is based on their doctrine that gays are evil unless they deny their sexuality and lead miserable, loveless lives. The RC hierarchy tried to pull this shit in Canada, too, threatening politicians with eternal damnation and the like if they supported C-38. I can’t see how it’s anything _but_ attempting to have the state enforce Catholic doctrine. I’m sure they’d lobby for disallowing divorcees from remarrying if they thought there was a ghost of a chance they’d succeed. It seems there’s a significant element in the RC Church that looks back on the time when religious and civil authorities were entwined during the Middle Ages as the good old days. Still bitter about the 30 Years War, maybe. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/16 "2005-09-30T14:59:46Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > Because you and they have different views of what the role of goverment should be. You think that the role of government should be to allow people to have maximum freedom so long as they don’t hurt anyone else, and not to judge between different moral or world views. They think the role of government should be to encourage a specific moral worldview and specific social and societal values. Then perhaps they should read the U.S. Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Preample some time. > [@Declaration of Independence](#): > > We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed… My view of the role of government is consistent with the principles espoused by the founders. Perhaps it’s an **appeal to authority** to fall back on the Constitution for support; but there it is. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/17 "2005-09-30T15:24:28Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > That isn’t what I see happening. It seems more appropriate to describe this as individual Catholics and the Church having an opinion about what civil marriage ought to be. And is that view informed by anything other than official Church doctrine on the definition of marriage? What is the civil, non-religious argument against gay marriage? And if there is such an argument, why is the Church punishing its members over a secular matter? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2005, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/18 "2005-09-30T17:10:43Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > My view of the role of government is consistent with the principles espoused by the founders. Perhaps it’s an **appeal to authority** to fall back on the Constitution for support; but there it is. Right. Your view of the role of the government is probably more consistant with the classical liberal principles espoused by the founders than that of those Catholic bishops. But that’s to be expected. The Catholic Church has condemned classical liberalism. They have different values than the founders. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2005, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/19 "2005-10-01T00:41:08Z")
One day soon the Catholic church is going to collectively awake to the fact that loving someone of the same gender is “morally wrong” in exactly the same way that eating meat on Friday is. The institution should be grateful to Catholics like Lange and Labaire for not rushing to help enshrine such embarassingly backwards thinking in the U.S. Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 1, 2005, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084/20 "2005-10-01T01:05:56Z")
Recall that the Catholic Church, or any other religious organization, does **not** in fact have the same rights that tax-paying individuals and institutions do to engage in political activity. From the [IRS Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations](http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=120703,00.html): > [@](#): > > In general, no organization may qualify for section 501©(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). A 501©(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.[…] > > An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation. > > Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying. For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status. […] > > Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501©(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Catholic bishops leading a signature drive for an amendment to restore discriminatory marriage laws would definitely fall under the head of political “lobbying”, AFAICT. They probably wouldn’t fail the “substantial-part” test because they aren’t spending that much time lobbying, but I think it isn’t inappropriate to start making some noises about the possibility of revoking their tax-exempt status if they go on like this. Churches and other tax-free organizations are given their tax-exempt status precisely because they’re assumed to be devoting themselves to the public welfare in a non-partisan manner, without mixing up in specific legislative issues. If they want to use their institutional clout and resources to press for particular political outcomes, let them pay their goddamn taxes like the rest of us. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mass-priests-punished-for-non-support-of-ssm-ban/324084.md?page=2)