"What will happen to Catholics and others . . . ?"

[Procrustus]

@Paranoid_Randroid

Waiting and hoping? That’s about it.

or praying.

[tomndebb]

Having more time to review the linked site, I note that it is not an actual proclamation by the church, but a commentary on church teachings by Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict).
The list is interesting in that it includes reserving the priesthood to men. When Pope John Paul II declared that the discussion on ordaining women was “closed,” then-Cardinal Ratzinger rushed forward to declare that statement an infallible decree. Pope John Paul, however, when asked about it, said that he had not issued an infallible decree.

The linked article provides insight into the workings of the RCC, (along with some maneuvering by Ratzinger to put his stamp on church teachings), but it does not provide a comprehensive list of infallible declarations. I would also note that, (so far), Pope Benedict has made no effort to reaffirm the infallible nature of the declaration that the discussion is closed regarding ordaining women. (He might be a bit more cautious now that he is actually the head honcho.)

[Illuminatiprimus]

@BigT

No it doesn’t. You justify it by showing how it doesn’t violate the law. In the U.S., the church is effectively subservient to the law. I don’t know why people pretend it isn’t.

Now, of course, you can, via your new religion, advocate for changing the law. But the idea that you can still break the law because your religion tells you you can is not found in our legal system.

As for our moral system: how many people do you know that break the law because of their religion? I’m not aware of any, but surely you have some in mind, Because, apparently, this is supposed to be accepted by the majority as being okay.

Whilst you’re correct about the US, I live in the EU, and there is case law within the European Human Rights framework that allows people to cite religious belief as an exemption from following certain laws or regulations in certain circumstances. It’s certainly not a catch all excuse, and one of the articles specifically states that rights under other articles can’t be used to contravene the other rights (so arguing my right to freedom of religious belief trumps your right not to be killed as a homosexual is immediately negated).