Religion in public politics

[Lamplighter]

The same issues are apparent in housing:

freerepublic.com
March 25, 2011

USCCB Urges HUD Not to Include Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

WASHINGTON (March 25, 2011)——The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
has urged the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) not to adopt
a proposed regulation that would add sexual orientation and gender identity
to the list of protected categories for which discrimination in HUD programs is prohibited.<snip>

“By this, we do not mean that any person should be denied housing.
Making decisions about shared housing, however, is another matter,” wrote Picarello and Moses.
“Particularly here, faith-based and other organizations should retain the freedom
they have always had to make housing placements in a manner consistent
with their religious beliefs, including when it concerns a cohabiting couple,
be it an unmarried heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple.<snip>

Given the very large role that faith-based organizations play in HUD programs,
the regulation, by infringing upon that freedom, may have the ultimate effect
of driving away organizations with a long and successful track record in meeting housing needs,
leaving beneficiaries without the housing that they sought or that the government intended them to receive.”

Granted, religious organizations have, indeed, played major roles in community support
and development. (e.g., hospitals, summer camps, homeless shelters, etc.)

But are such "traditional activities" of an organization sufficient or genuine arguments
for exemption when it comes to housing, employment, or health care, or other venues of civil rights ?

I have a very hard time trying to justify such arguments.
Instead, I would propose that if an organization elected to move away from such services,
and therefore forgo the government funding, that other organizations
would step in to cover the gaps in needed services.
.