Supreme Court plaintiffs claim discrimination after Catholic cemetery rejects pro-gay headstone
The homosexual plaintiffs behind the Supreme
Court case legalizing gay “marriage” across the U.S. are claiming
discrimination after a Catholic cemetery declined their headstone design
because it conflicted with Church teaching.
"It's pretty clear when you read the
letter that this is a clear case of LGBT discrimination," said Greg
Bourke, one-half of the same-sex Louisville, KY, couple named as plaintiffs in
Obergefell v. Hodges.
Bourke and Michael De Leon held a press conference
Wednesday outside St. Michael Cemetery to claim the Archdiocese of Louisville
was discriminating against them for its rejection of the tombstone, local NBC
affiliate WAVE-3 reports. Bourke says the archdiocese was getting a pass on
showing prejudice against the men because of religious protection in
anti-discrimination law.
"We wanted to see if there might be any
kind of a legal challenge that we can make," Bourke stated. "Honestly
there are legal protection laws, there's an exclusion in the fairness ordinance
that protect religious organizations, so that they have a license to
discriminate."
Bourke and De Leon’s proposed headstone design
blatantly revels in the Obergefell decision redefining marriage, sporting an
image of the Supreme Court building beneath a pair of intertwined wedding rings
between their two last names. Below the image of the high court building, their
first names and middle initials, along with space for their respective dates of
death are divided by a cross.
The homosexual publication The
Advocate reprinted part
of a March 30 letter the men had received from Javier Rajardo, executive
director of Catholic Cemeteries for the Louisville archdiocese, informing them
that their marker design was at odds with Church teaching and therefore not
appropriate for a Catholic cemetery.
“Having reviewed your proposed gravestone
inscription please note we can approve your shared stone with both your names
and dates of birth and of course the religious symbol of the cross,” it read.
“Inscriptions on grave markers are permitted so long as they do not conflict
with any teachings of the Church. Your proposed markings are not in keeping
with this requirement.”
Bourke said at Wednesday’s “Freedom to Bury”
press conference the men were told that new guidelines for memorials were being
developed for same sex couples, yet Archdiocese of Louisville Chief
Communication Officer Cecelia Hart Price told LifeSiteNews the Cemeteries
office has had an approval process for all markers dating back many years.
The archdiocese also provided the following
statement to LifeSiteNews:
A Catholic cemetery is a place that serves the
faithful and witnesses to the Good News of Jesus Christ and the hope we share
in the resurrection. This ministry of the sacred rite of burial is
offered to the Catholic community and all of God’s people. To this end, it is a
place where the signs and symbols of our Catholic faith are displayed with
pride and reverence.
As with all markers in Catholic Cemeteries,
determination as to the appropriateness of inscriptions or symbols is the
judgment of the Executive Director of Catholic Cemeteries in consultation with
the proper Church authority.
In this
case, the judgment was made that the depiction presented was not in keeping
with Church teaching about marriage. Mr. Bourke and Mr. De Leon are
welcome to present another headstone design for approval.
Bourke and De Leon, longtime attendees of Our
Lady of Lourdes Parish in Louisville, were named the 2015 “persons of
the year” by the dissenting National Catholic Reporter
publication for the men’s role in undercutting marriage, which lauded “their
faithful public witness as gay Catholics.”
Denial of the headstone design celebrating
homosexual “marriage” garnered pushback from LGBT activists, with the Human
Rights Campaign (HRC) calling it a “narrow and hurtful decision by the
Archdiocese.”
The Advocate piece said the men were
“accustomed to discrimination within the Catholic Church,” citing Bourke having
been asked to resign as a Boy Scout troop leader at his
parish in
2012 after announcing
his sexual orientation.
Despite the Boy Scouts of America lifting its
restriction on openly gay adult leaders last year, religiously-affiliated
troops can continue to choose leaders in accord with their beliefs, and the Our
Lady of Lourdes troop denied his application to rejoin.
Bourke had indicated at the time he would make
a public fuss to Louisville Archbishop Joseph Kurtz for the rejection.
“Clearly we have to draw attention to the
Archdiocese,” Bourke stated, “and specifically Archbishop Joseph Kurtz for
making this decision, which was really unnecessary and I think quite
mean-spirited.”
He created a Change.org petition telling the
archbishop, “End your unnecessary ban on Boy Scout leaders and re-approve my
membership,” and also criticized the
prelate for affirming Church teaching that individuals experiencing same-sex
attraction must remain chaste.
The Catholic League defended the Louisville
archdiocese for upholding Catholic morals in its cemetery policy.
“The First Amendment ensures the free exercise
of religion, and if that means anything, it means the right of religious
institutions to determine their own strictures,” the group’s President Bill
Donohue said in a statement. “That would include the right to deny those who
seek to politicize Catholic graveyards.”
“These men are not interested in tolerance, they want to impose their secular views on the Catholic Church,” Donohue said. “Hopefully, this contrived exercise in victimhood will open the eyes of those Americans who fail to distinguish between ordinary gays and militant gay activists. It is the latter, along with their heterosexual allies, who are seeking to sexually engineer our society—not even bathrooms and showers are off-limits—practicing intolerance in the name of ‘rights.’”
“These men are not interested in tolerance, they want to impose their secular views on the Catholic Church,” Donohue said. “Hopefully, this contrived exercise in victimhood will open the eyes of those Americans who fail to distinguish between ordinary gays and militant gay activists. It is the latter, along with their heterosexual allies, who are seeking to sexually engineer our society—not even bathrooms and showers are off-limits—practicing intolerance in the name of ‘rights.’”
