After all, the churches are charitable institutions, with a higher calling to help the sick and weak in the name of a loving God. They have a role model in Jesus, who reached out to those rejected by society. Turn away the needy? That would be unchristian.
Unless, of course, the needy were some sick pervert. Then it’s OK to kick her to the door; in fact, you’re obligated to reject her, even if it costs you lots of money.
Read the charming story of faith-based discrimination in a Minnesota church. Trinity Lutheran Church had a sweet deal with county social services, getting remunerated for caring for disabled seniors, until the county pulled a fast one and tried to trick them into caring for a
damned minion of the devil transsexual. They signed her up, showed her around, and then she mentioned that she’d had an operation, and the good reverend had to wield his deep personal knowledge of god’s mind to smack her down.
The church declined to accept her. It said its staff wasn’t trained to deal with such a person. It feared discomfort among members and other clients, not least over use of the bathroom. And it pointed to its own theological beliefs. What she has done, Maxfield said, runs totally “contrary to God’s revealed will.”
Hallelujah! And this is exactly why I will always oppose any attempt to draft the godly into the business of supporting the social safety net. It is this pretense of knowing the will of an invisible being, which they freely use to give their bigotry the deity’s imprimatur, which makes them untrustworthy. Anyone who makes untestable claims of a god’s will, claims that can’t be verified by anyone else, is suspect—it’s simply too convenient an out. And when it’s used to make an innocent suffer, it’s simply contemptible.