LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY velvetpage)

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20061021/25444.htm

My take: he ignores one extremely important point: churches or faith organizations that do not accept state funds do not have to change anything about how they operate. Any church that refuses tax money is in the clear. The restrictions he's talking about are all absolutely voluntary on the part of the organizations. If there's no state funding, there's no problem. And nothing anywhere states that religious organizations have a right to receive tax money.

EDIT: I wrote them a letter.

I saw one major flaw in Mr. Colson's argument that religious freedom is under attack due to same-sex marriage legislation. He states that religious organizations which receive state funds can be forced to comply with equality measures for homosexuals. I have to wonder: since when is receiving tax money a right? It seems to me that these organizations are entirely free to practice their religion, as they have always been, if they refuse tax money and limit their activities to things which are not the purview of the state, such as adoptions. No one is forcing them to accept state funding or perform actions that are against their doctrines. They always have a choice. No one ever said that walking the Christian walk would be easy; in fact, quite the opposite. If religious charities are going to accept public funds, they need to be prepared to abide by the standards that non-religious charities take for granted. Otherwise, their choice is clear: refuse public funds and contracts in areas that violate their beliefs.

It's not persecution unless and until that choice is taken away.