Civil Unions and Religious Organizations

This may be an interesting case to follow. It may be resolved legally by balancing the rights of same-sex couples with the right of a religious organization to follow church principles.

No middle ground in foster care lawsuit
(Editorial Opinion, The State Journal-Register, July 15, 2011)

Sangamon County Circuit Judge John Schmidt made a prudent decision this week in stopping the state from canceling foster care contracts for nearly 2,000 children with Catholic Charities in four Illinois Catholic dioceses.

“I’m putting a freeze on this case until we can (argue) the issues,” Schmidt said on Tuesday as he issued a preliminary injunction halting the state’s action. “We’re not going to be removing children from homes.”

Catholic Charities in the dioceses of Springfield, Joliet, Peoria and Belleville have placed 1,997 children in foster homes through contracts with the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. But Catholic Charities has stated that it will not place foster children in households headed by couples in civil unions, which became legal beginning June 1 under the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act. Catholic Charities’ position is a civil rights violation under Illinois law, thus DCFS’s abrupt notice summarily cutting ties with the agency.

For the sake of the children already placed in foster homes through Catholic Charities, we urge DCFS to work out a compromise that extends a grandfather clause for contracts signed prior to this court case. Foster children need stability more than anything else. Any action that interrupts the stability they have found in existing foster families runs counter to the missions of both DCFS and Catholic Charities.

Beyond addressing the status of existing foster care contracts, however, we see very little room for compromise going forward between Catholic Charities and the state on the issue of adoption and foster care referrals. We hope we can be proven incorrect on this, because Catholic Charities has long performed an immensely important service — namely, finding homes for children who need them and providing people with an opportunity to realize parenthood who might not otherwise have the chance.

But this case touches on the very fundamental principles of civil rights in this state and the First Amendment prohibition on government interference in religion.

Catholic Charities abides by Catholic teaching on marriage. It does not place foster children or facilitate adoptions in homes where couples are unmarried but living together, and Church doctrine says couples in civil unions are not married.

Church advocates had pushed for an exemption to the civil unions law during the spring legislative session, but supporters of civil unions argued — correctly, we believe — that this would have amounted to the state sanctioning violation of the civil rights protection that the law represents.

Gov. Pat Quinn was unequivocal this week in support of the state’s position.

“We have a law in Illinois. We’re not going back,” Quinn said.

Catholic Charities’ lawyers have said that a clause in the law allows religious organizations not to recognize civil unions if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. That is certain to be the major issue as this week’s court case proceeds.

But just as the state can’t dictate to religious organizations how to define marriage, neither can it pass civil rights laws and then be party to their violation.

As gay rights advance, should religious groups get accommodation?
-by Charles C. Haynes

When rights claims collide, what’s the collateral damage to society?

That’s the painful question this week out of Illinois, site of the latest conflict between gay-rights laws and religious convictions.

When the state’s new civil-unions law took effect June 1, a Catholic diocese in northern Illinois ended its state-funded adoption and foster-care program rather than be required to place children with same-sex couples.

Catholic Charities in other Illinois dioceses may follow suit unless the state Legislature amends the law to exempt faith-based groups from the application of the civil-unions law in adoption and foster-care programs.

Collectively, Catholic dioceses across the state provide services to some 2,300 children of the 15,000 children in the foster-care system. Although state officials promise that other agencies will fill the gap as needed, many foster families in northern Illinois are upset about losing their relationship with Catholic Charities.

In two other places where same-sex unions have won legal recognition, the story has been much the same.

Earlier this year, Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., ended its contract to provide foster-care and adoption services for D.C. residents in the wake of the legalization of same-sex marriage in the city. And in 2006, Catholic Charities of Boston ended state-funded adoption services because placing children with same-sex couples – who can be legally married in Massachusetts – would violate church teachings.

Not surprisingly, emotions run high on both sides of this debate.

“We can no longer contract with the State of Illinois,” said a spokesman for the northern Illinois diocese, “whose laws would force us to participate in activity offensive to the moral teachings of the church.” In response, Civil Rights Agenda, a gay-rights group in Illinois, called the church’s decision “a sad display of bigotry.”

For some critics of the church’s position, government funding is the key issue. Speaking about the conflict between Catholic Charities and the Washington, D.C., government, Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State put it this way: “If ‘faith-based’ charities cannot or will not obey civil rights laws, they ought not benefit from public funds.”

Although I wouldn’t say Catholic Charities “benefits” by using state funds to help children, I do agree that taxpayer dollars should come with nondiscrimination requirements. At the same time, however, I believe there should be room for religious exemptions, especially when claims of conscience are at stake.

I would feel differently if same-sex couples in Illinois, Boston and D.C. didn’t have readily available alternatives – but they do. In Illinois, some 45 private agencies, most secular, provide state-funded adoption and foster-care services. For years, Catholic Charities in northern Illinois has referred same-sex couples (as well as unmarried straight couples living together) to other agencies – a practice that appears to have worked well.

With recent polls showing a slim majority of Americans now favoring gay marriage (and bigger numbers endorsing civil unions), legalization of same-sex relationships will undoubtedly spread to more parts of the country. But should the advance of gay rights force a retreat of faith-based groups from adoption and foster-care programs? Or can we accommodate religious convictions by carving out exemptions in civil-union and gay-marriage laws?

Ensuring that Catholic Charities (and other faith-based groups) can participate in state-funded programs and continue their work on behalf of children in need not only would serve the common good, but it also would reaffirm our commitment to liberty of conscience as a fundamental human right.

Equality and liberty are core American principles, but neither should trump the other. Let’s uphold both by moving from gay rights vs. religious freedom to gay rights and religious freedom.

ACLU joins suit against Catholic Charities
(By Manya A. Brachear, The Chicago Tribune, August 2, 2011)

The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois got the go-ahead Monday to intervene in a lawsuit and join the state's battle against Catholic Charities' policy of turning away prospective parents who are in civil unions.

Catholic Charities in Joliet, Peoria, Springfield and Belleville filed the lawsuit this summer, asking a Sangamon County judge to uphold their policy of providing publicly funded foster care and adoption services only to married couples and single parents living alone, while referring couples in civil unions to other agencies.

On Monday, the judge allowed the ACLU of Illinois to intervene after lawyers argued that allowing Catholic Charities to reject parents based on sexual orientation or religious belief violates the federal consent decree designed to improve conditions for children in the care of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services.

ACLU lawyers said the consent decree requires the state to consider nothing but the "best interests of the child," not the religious beliefs of a private foster agency, when making decisions about placement.

"Catholic Charities is ruling out possible parents based on factors that have nothing to do with the best interests of the children," said ACLU lawyer Karen Sheley.

The ACLU also intervened on behalf of Sarah Riddle and Katherine Weseman, a Champaign couple in a civil union who would like to become foster parents and adopt children.

Riddle, 33, said that although children are not in the couple's immediate future, she and her partner are taking action to make sure the process runs smoothly when they are ready.

"It's best to make sure you have a plan in place and you're fighting for the things you believe in so when you actually need them, they're there," Riddle said. "We're making sure when we're moving forward, we're absolutely in a place where we can make it happen."

Tom Brejcha, an attorney for the Thomas More Society who is representing Catholic Charities, said Riddle and Weseman could apply to Catholic Charities to become foster parents and would not be questioned about their sexual orientation, he said. They would be referred elsewhere only if they volunteered that information.

Brejcha questioned why the couple would go to a Catholic agency when there are many agencies that don't have religious objections to unmarried couples.

"No one is preventing them from being foster parents if that's what they want," Brejcha said. "They don't like Catholic Charities' ideological position — a position held for 2,000 years. It doesn't make sense."

Shutting down Catholic Charities is "certainly the antithesis of serving Illinois' children who are abused and neglected," Brejcha said.

Riddle said the issue isn't her disagreement with Catholic principles.

"We would have plenty of options as parents. These are kids who don't have options," Riddle said. "We have seen the good that a good foster parent can do for children. This is very meaningful for us."

It is actually more than just losing funds, the state can take their license away.

1. Religious adoption agencies are exempt from the provisions in the Illinois Human Rights Act regarding places of public accommodation. The Illinois Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of marital status and sexual orientation, provides examples of places of public accommodation. The language of the Act specifically lists that non-sectarian adoption agencies are places of public accommodation. Because the law specifically lists non-sectarian adoption agencies, the obvious implication is that sectarian (or religiously-based) adoption agencies, including Catholic Charities and Catholic Social Services, are not places of public accommodation, and therefore are exempt from the Act.

2. Religious agencies are exempt from the Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Unions Act. The civil union law stated in Section 15 that “Nothing in this Act shall interfere with the religious practice of any religious body.” During the Senate debate on the bill, Senator Koehler (the Senate sponsor) was asked if this language was meant to refer to religious practices such as “social services, retreats, religious camps, homeless shelters, senior care centers, adoption agencies, hospitals.” Senator Koehler responded that his intent “is not to at all… impede the rights that religious organizations have to carry out… what their duties and… religious activities are.” Therefore, religious agencies are exempted from the civil union law, and furthermore, the ability of religious agencies to provide social services, including foster care and adoption services, is not to be impeded by this law.

3. The Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act protects the religious freedom of religious agencies in the provision of foster care and adoption services. The Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act states that the government may not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion unless such burden both furthers a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. The exercise of religion by our Catholic agencies is substantially burdened if the provisions of the Illinois Human Rights Act, as they pertain to places of public accommodation, are applied to them or if the civil union law is read to require religious agencies to process foster parent applications for or to make placements with civil union couples. There is no compelling government interest in placing such a substantial burden on religious agencies, and moreover, the “least restrictive alternative” in this issue would be to allow religious agencies to refer civil union couples to DCFS, through which they would have ample opportunity to become foster parents with other agencies. The state’s refusal to allow for such referrals is in violation of the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act.