Arguements of Interested Parties from National Post blog

Randal Oulton >> where the state dictates to places of worship
And lord knows, the Catholic church has *never* tried to tell the State what to do.

=====

CS67 >>The key here is that this is not a job, but a voluntary role within service of the faith. If the faith is of the belief that the sexual orientation of a member is not within the scope of acceptance, the HRT really has no say. The individual in question can certainly attend the church and follow Christ, but participation would be akin to a Satanist taking up the same role. If you do not conscribe to the faith, you cannot represent it. Like it or not, the government (HRT) cannot tell the church what to believe.

=====

cloudlift >>Human rights are written in Law participation in church is volunteer, law must and will always trump dogma. The beliefs of a few christian primitives should not allow should not be allowed to stop our country from "growing up". To call love between two people a depraved act is inflammatory in particular coming from the morally bankrupt catholic church were depravity perpetrated upon children by thousands of clergy world wide has been tastily supported by it's leadership protecting the perpetrators for generations.

=====

Felicity Hangnail >> As an institution that demands and accepts taxpayers $ to support it's activities, the RCC should be 100% prone to the legal strictures of this country. Claiming to be free from the legal obligations faced by law-abiding Canadians speaks volumes about ever-present CATHOLIC BIGOTRY in most aspects of Canadian society.

=====

Chrysostom >> How typical of the secular-minded to be so irrational and ignorant.
Now, turning to this issue at hand, what will be next? Will women and girls complain to the HRC that they are not permitted to be servers and priests?

=====

hoppy96 >> The HRC's mandate should be limited to discrimination in housing, emploment, and social services. It should have jurisdiction over employment in the church since the church does accept favourable tax treatments, etc. from the State. But not have jurisdiction over doctrine related, volunteer positions within a religious group. Having said that, I also agree that the Catholic Church stands out as one of the world's greatest examples of hypocriscy, taking the position homosexuality is a great sin, while it's priests diddle little boys and girls all around the world.

=====

crocodile dundee >> RandalOulton writes "And lord knows, the Catholic church has *never* tried to tell the State what to do."
There's a big difference between the church publicly stating its opposition to government policy and the unelected, unaccountable HRC dictating to the Catholic church how it must conduct its services.

=====

pierrepharand >> Whatever happened to freedom of religion? Human Rights Commissions have outlived their usefulness. The Catholic Church has its teachings regarding homosexuality, and it follows them. They don't do it because they want to offend people, they do it because they make the decision between what is right and what is easy everyday. And they choose the former option over the latter. I'm not saying burn gays, lesbians and bisexuals, etc. at the stake. Absolutely not. The separation of Church and State happened and was drastically needed. However, now we are seeing the State interferring with the Church's affairs. It is not its place. Whatever happened to the separation of State from religion?

=====

Rectificatif >> there is no gov't organization that has any legitimate say in how they serve the Mass and who does it.

=====

QUARK1912 >> Even as a recovering catholic I can understand that being an alter server is not a right but a privilege which may be revoked for any or no reason. The Ontario Human Rights Commission may or may not uphold the principle of the separation of church and state but that is not the point, here the process is the punishment. The O.H.R.C. may take on a soft target like a R.C. diocese but I am sure the separation of mosque and state principle is inviolable.

=====

PM29 >> The man is publicly flaunting his disobedience to Catholic teaching. It boggles the mind that someone who (obviously) has no respect for the precepts of the Church feels entitled to a prominent and visible role in the mass. He's just lucky he hasn't been excommunicated (he's pretty much begging for it).

=====

Brian25 >> Churches are exempted from taxes to fulfill the separation of church and state -- if they paid taxes, they would be legitimate participants in the political process, thus violating that status of separation.

=====

The Truth Hurts >> This rule would not just apply to homosexuals. If a man/woman was living with common-law they would and should removed from any type of church service. These are the rules if you don't like them go to the United Church where anything goes.

=====

Blazingcatfur >> Mr. Corcoran has hired an ex-communicated priest to work at his spa - Ed Cachia. This ex-priest was ex-communicated by Bishop De Angelis the respondent in the case.
This may or may not point to an agenda.

=====

RobertA9 >> Separation of Church and State is a two-way, not a one-way street. Freedom of religion gives religious institutions a protected zone of autonomy in matters of doctrine, worship and discipline. We may disagree with the way this case was handled, but it is clearly an internal Church matter in which the Human Rights Tribunal has neither competence nor jurisdiction.