Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association has filed suit in federal court to prevent New Jersey from forcing it to violate United Methodist beliefs and doctrines. This suit is in response to a suit brought by two homosexual couples who wanted to use the Camp's worship facilities to host their wedding. Since the United Methodist Church holds that "homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching" and that marriage of homosexuals is expressly forbidden, the Camp stood up for these beliefs and refused to allow their facilities to be used for this purpose.
Rather than seeking a place that would allow their "wedding" to take place, the couples filed suit against the Camp claiming discrimination. The Camp countered that they have the First Amendment right to not be forced by the government to violate its beliefs. This is why "separation of church and state" is of absolute importance. If the government can say that the church's stance on homosexuality "marriage" is illegal, then the government can say that the church's stance on any other issue is illegal. In the end if this is allowed to go forward unchecked, all that would remain are churches which tow the government's line or underground churches which face harassment and persecution. Christianity in America would become much like the churches that existed under the Nazis or the Communists.
I applaud the Camp for doing the right thing. By standing up and not buckling in to the pressure brought by the State they make it possible for churches across our nation to remain true to the gospel. And whether one agrees with their position or not, no faithful person can want the government to dictate doctrine to the Church.
The misinformation campaign continues, it seems:
1) The Ocean Grove Camp Association is not a church. So, the "sky is falling" complaints about Nazis and churches, in addition to being completely over the top melodrama is an incorrect analogy. (By the way, ever heard of Godwin's Law?)
2) Not only isn't it a church, but it isn't a church group either. It's a community of 5000 people. Public accommodations are PUBLIC.
3) This group has no official ties to the UMC.
4) The gazebo isn't a worship facility. Worship is held there about 15 times a year. What is being requested is not that Methodists “host” something but rather that the Camp Meeting Association make available a gazebo-like structure on the boardwalk for civil unions as they have heretofore made it available for weddings of all denominations and faiths and purely civil affairs. Moreover, the structure, with no doors or windows, is principally used as a shady resting place on the boardwalk.
You're right, we must have separation of church and state...so that pretend "church" organizations like this can't hide behind religion in order to discriminate.
Really, you should examine the facts before spreading misinformation, simply because you saw it on some website somewhere. Read the ACTUAL complaint and you'll see that my points are accurate while yours are not.
Posted by: alan | September 04, 2007 at 03:16 PM
The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association may not be a church in the technical sense, but they are a recognized ministry organization with deep ties to Methodism: "The mission of the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, rooted in its Methodist heritage, is to provide opportunities for spiritual birth, growth and renewal through worship, education, cultural and recreational programs for persons of all ages in a Christian seaside setting." If you look at their original charter, the Association was affiliated with the Methodist Episcopal Church and the paragraph preceding the charter, written by the Trustees, is heavily peppered with biblical and religious references.
My ministry is not technically a church, either, but it is a non-profit organization with a religious identity...similiar to the Camp Association. If I were to build a pavilion somewhere and refuse to marry a homosexual couple, it would seem to me that I could do so because the government cannot force its will on my religious beliefs and practices.
Brian Raum, who is representing the Association, summed it up when he said, "religious organizations have a right to use their facilities in a way that is consistent with their teachings" -- adding that "if the state comes in and tells the church or religious organization that they have to permit same-sex civil unions, or anything else for that matter, we have a big constitutional problem on our hands." (onenewsnow.com)
Posted by: Mark Winter | September 14, 2007 at 07:35 AM
Sorry Mark, I have to disagree. Here's the kicker... "My ministry is not technically a church, either, "
Not a church. Churches are protected from this sort of thing, they get all sorts of exemptions for all sorts of things.
Should a non-profit be allowed to refuse to serve racial minorities? Of course not. What I find odd is that people are actually defending this sort of discrimination, as if discrimination is somehow a Christian value.
This organization has allowed weddings from other faiths in this gazebo, so they lost the opportunity to play that "we don't agree with them" card when they decided that money was more important than their so-called standards some time ago.
Posted by: alan | September 19, 2007 at 02:52 PM