October 14, 2006

How Sue and Jill's Wedding Affects... the Knights of Columbus?

Justin Katz

This latest of a string of similar stories from Canada over the past few years ought to be taken into consideration as the individual steps toward Rhode Island's undemocratic importation of same-sex marriage are taken:

In 2003 [the Knights in Port Coquitlam, B.C.] discovered that their hall had been rented by a lesbian couple to celebrate their wedding. But as Catholics the Knights followed Catholic teaching and the Church opposes same-sex marriage. They offered to find another hall for the couple, pay for its rental and also for new invitations to be printed: Sorry for the bother and all that and I'm sure you understand.

Not quite. The couple in question decided to take their oppressors to the provincial Human Rights Commission, who ruled last year that the women should be compensated for "undue hardship." Representatives of the complainants said that the punishment was too mild and that they intended to appeal the ruling.

Which only goes to prove that those silly old Neanderthals who oppose gay marriage are being fanatical when they say that their rights are being questioned. ...

The fact is that no priest, rabbi or imam is going to be forced at bayonet-point to perform a gay wedding. That, however, has never really been the issue. As one of the leaders of the gay community said to me on television, "We'd never demand that someone conduct a ceremony, but if they oppose the law I do think we should question their charitable status."

In response to some comment box sarcasm from Jay, perhaps I should elaborate on what is actually wrong — even insidious — about this sort of "progress."

The extreme idealization of anti-discrimination that has become fashionable, particularly on the Left, undermines what is perhaps the most fundamental principle required to ensure a civil, pluralistic, and free society: that differences can and should be addressed, perhaps resolved, in realms other than government as much as possible. It is a thinly veiled totalitarianism, indeed, that insists that citizens are entirely free, as long as their public behavior accords with the reigning belief system.

Jay's sarcasm is a wonderful example of the sort of non-government pressure that can be brought to bear in the social sphere as an effective means of phrasing an issue so as to encourage social change toward a particular worldview. Of course, Jay's specific commentary is also a wonderful example of the perils of wielding such rhetoric: when it is expressed in terms of social pressure, rather than legal reasoning, one can reasonably wonder whether its proponents actually believe in freedom at all.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

What ever happened to Freedom ?

The Knights of Columbus,or any other private business should be free to discrimanate against any group.Gays, Lesbians,African Americans,Hispanics, Jews,Muslims,Catholics,Baptist,Straigts
Caucasians yes EVEN CAUCASIANS.

RIP George Wallace

Posted by: jay at October 14, 2006 2:43 PM

This reminds me of the jihad being waged against the Boy Scouts by the ACLU - all for having the audacity of remaining true to their principles and having won at the U.S. Supreme Court - over the Scouts refusual to endorse openly-homosexual scoutmasters and insisting that those who (voluntarily) want to join embrace God.

An Orwellian stance for an organization that claims to exist to protect "civil liberties" - but perfectly consistent with an radical left organization - with its roots in Communism - that wants to eradicate religion and religious beliefs.

Posted by: Tom W at October 14, 2006 3:58 PM

No it was NOT Sarcasm.
I do not think that a gay guesthouse in P-Town should be forced to rent a room to Pat Robertson,Jerry Falwell,or Steve Laffey.Or anyone else who would do them harm.
Also the Knights of Columbus should not
be forced to allow Gay Marriages,in there building.
I belive in freedom for ALL, gays and straight.

Posted by: Jay at October 14, 2006 6:29 PM

No it was NOT Sarcasm.
I do not think that a gay guesthouse in P-Town should be forced to rent a room to Pat Robertson,Jerry Falwell,or Steve Laffey.Or anyone else who would do them harm.
Also the Knights of Columbus should not
be forced to allow Gay Marriages,in there building.
I belive in freedom for ALL, gays and straight.

Posted by: Jay at October 14, 2006 6:29 PM

No Boy Scout Troop Should ever be forced to except a gay scout or scoutmaster,the KoC should not be forced to have gay marriages.And a gay couple should not be forced to rent an apartment to a anti-gay couple.A gay-bar
should not be forced to hire a straight
No sarcasm..Freedom for ALL.

Posted by: Jay at October 14, 2006 7:01 PM

Same sex marriage is a topic that is coming to our town of Westerly. We have an openly gay politician named Daryl Finizio who is running for town council. The problem that I have with it is we are a town with strong Roman Catholic core beliefs. How can a man who lives with his male lover properly represent all of the values that I feel so strongly about.

I am ashamed that he is running for office in my town. I consider myself to be a conservative Democrat and Daryl is running as a Republican so I probably wouldn't have voted for him anyway but I will continue to get the word out at my church and recruit other church members to write letters to the editor in the coming weeks!


Posted by: Bryan Handrigan at October 16, 2006 8:44 AM

Apparently another "confusing" issue for "Mr." Finizio is which party he actually belongs to. He was a Democrat Delegate in 2000. The more I uncover about this individual the more questions I have. More to come.

Delegates for GORE:
Anthony DeLUCA
Catherine E WEINER
Patrick K BUTLER
Balbina A YOUNG
Nehru KING
Lawrence E PURTILL

Posted by: Bryan Handrigan at October 16, 2006 11:51 AM

If the Westerly GOP (and Algiere) is behind Finizio, they are to be commended for some backbone and out-of-the-box thinking. Maybe Finizio supports keeping government small and taxes low - true conservative principles the GOP used to stand for before getting too wrapped up in culture wars.

Posted by: Rhody at October 16, 2006 12:09 PM


I have one issue with your comment and that is that Senator Algiere supports him. That has nothing to do with religious values. I'm not sure if Algiere does or does not support him but I can say that Senator Algiere will back away from any bad press if he's smart. Religious values have long been an important topic in politics and on this board. I do understand where Bryan is coming from. This is a difficult issue for us Catholics. You have to at least recognize that. Is that fair to say?
East Providence (not even close to Westerly)

Posted by: Troy at October 16, 2006 12:16 PM

Troy, I'm just as curious as you are to hear what Algiere has to say on this subject.
And you're right, this does put Catholics (and Republicans) in a ticklish position. We've all learned over the past three weeks that there are more gays in powerful positions within the GOP (including those employed by politicians whose public policies are strongly anti-gay) than we all could've imagined.
As for myself, I believe Christ was a progressive, and would not have been bothered by gays as much as many who profess to speak for him believe - the Bible reading of many people of faith goes deeper than the Book of Leviticus.

Posted by: Rhody at October 16, 2006 7:11 PM

... Wait a minute. Finizio went FROM Democrat TO Republican? You're saying, he was a Democrat (who, admittedly, are friendlier to gays). But he got a good look at what he'd have to do and who he'd have to endorse to stay a Democrat and he said, "I'm gone". Six years later, he hasn't looked back. And somehow, you think this counts against him?? You may want to return to your arsenal. This attack fell kind of flat.

And don't bother to trot out the gay bashing stuff again. It's boring. Finizio prosthelytizes neither gayness nor religion, as well he should not. What matters in this state is integrity and fiscal responsibility and being willing to break away from the special interests (read: public labor unions) that are slowly strangling us.

Where do you stand on those matters, Mr. Handrigan?

Posted by: SusanD at October 16, 2006 9:44 PM

I found that it was actually just 3 years ago that he was a democrat. This isn't the first time he's switched partys. From what I could find out he's switched a least 3 times. That makes him a waffler. Someone who is not sure where he stands.

There have been times this year when asked "are you married" he hasn't been upfront about being gay depending on the crowd that he is playing to. So he's a liar too.

So he's a waffling liar. He's also a liar about 9/11. He wasn't in the trade center if he was working at town hall. If you ask me he should be ashamed for taking the credit of the real heroes!

Posted by: Bryan Handrigan at October 17, 2006 9:18 AM


Posted by: Rhody at October 17, 2006 11:10 AM

easy one! its called google and something else is coming in the paper if you want hard proof. Do you really hate religion and honesty that much?

Posted by: Bryan Handrigan at October 17, 2006 1:09 PM

Sounds like somebody's phobic nerve has been touched. But hey, people on a jihad to keep someone out of office on the base of gender or sexual preference tend to get pretty creative with their reasoning.

Posted by: rhody at October 17, 2006 1:57 PM

here Finizio was a Republican before he was a Democrat in the 2000 election before he was a Republican yet again. I wonder if Finizio likes syrup with his waffles.


Leaders of the New York City chapter include Timothy M. Concannon, president, t.concannon@lcrny.org; Stephen F. Scherock, vice president, s.scherock@lcrny.org; Paul A. Szczepanski, treasurer, p.szczepanski@lcrny.org; Daryl J. Finizio, political director, d.finizio@lcrny.org; and James A. Wagstaff, development director, j.wagstaff@lcrny.org. LCR, many of whose members seem to be gay, meets in Manhattan on the first Thursday of the month at 8:00 p.m. at:
Women's National Republican Club
3 W. 51 St. (west of Fifth Avenue)
New York, NY 10019-6909

phone (212) 886-1893
email info@lcrny.org

E train to Fifth Avenue and 53rd Street
F train to 50th Street and Avenue of the Americas

postal mail:
PO Box 2561
NY, NY 10163

Posted by: John at October 17, 2006 2:09 PM

Dear Bryan,

I understand that changing parties 3 times makes you look a little odd. I am also very concerned about someone who would suggest he was at ground zero when he was not.

However, what do being gay and marriage have to do with each other? Many bisexual and homosexual folks are in heterosexual, from the outisde, marriages.

Now, if he claims "straight" or "gay" depending on the audience, that's a different issue.

Posted by: Bobby Oliveira at October 17, 2006 2:13 PM

Bobby, if the guy really is lying about Ground Zero, that's a very legitimate reason not to vote for him. But that's not the reason Bryan declared jihad on him.
As for the party switching, this guy should just stay independent like I do. I'm voting for more Republicans than Democrats this year, but I haven't gotten any more conservative over the past four years, that's for sure!

Posted by: Rhody at October 17, 2006 2:33 PM

Bobby, Switching parties like the rest of us switch our underwear indicates a problem with commitment at the very least. If he isn't "straight" with the audience when asked are you married or do you have a wife would be an indirect lie for sure! My biggest concern is that he would capitalize on Sept. 11 by saying that he was in the world trade center when he was working somewhere else at the time is just unforgivable. Lastly, as a Catholic I am troubled by his lack of honesty about being gay when asked directly rather than the fact that he is gay alone.

Posted by: John at October 17, 2006 3:45 PM

And I'm wondering what the previous dozen or more comments actually have to do with the original post. Are they both cases of misrepresentation?

Posted by: smmtheory at October 17, 2006 8:36 PM

... the screeching sound of a wayward conversation thread coming to an abrupt halt.

I clicked on that first link. Scary. Individuals and private companies should not be compelled to provide service, whether it's a religous printer and a pro-gay brochure or a gay printer and Pat Robertson's lecture series.

Posted by: SusanD at October 17, 2006 9:38 PM

If Daryl Finizio is all over the place with his views then I wonder why the GOP in Westerly would support him. I too googled him and came up with some questions. It may just be a matter of the skeletons coming out of the closet now. It's interesting to see the GOP backing away from him like kriptonite. They're probably wise to do so. That would be smart based on the information coming out. I would not vote for him if he were running in my town. Voters in Westerly should have some serious questions about Mr. Finizio's candidacy.

Posted by: Wade at October 18, 2006 10:54 AM

If somebody hadn't raised a red flag over his being gay, would any of this other stuff (the party registrations, 9-11, etc.) have ever come out? Just curious.
If conservatives like Bryan start giving hetero candidates the same level of scrutiny (and raising red flags on legitimate issues), something positive will emerge from this debate.

Posted by: rhody at October 18, 2006 11:40 AM

I guess the way that it came about is at the very least questionable. The other issues are now out on the floor and must be addressed as we would with any other candidate. I do hope that Bryan goes after heterosexual candidates with as much energy as he has Mr. Finizio. I would hope that we can drop the gay candidate talk and get to the other serious questions about Mr. Finizio. I suspect we will continue to hear all about his being a homosexual too. It should be enough that there is all of these other questions on the table without bringing up his sexual preferences.

Posted by: Wade at October 18, 2006 12:06 PM

If Finizio's being gay is a problem how about a disgusting pervert on top of that. He always seems to be running for office somewhere. Before it was on the Eastside of Providence when he was living with is "wife", drops out of the race and runs home to Westerly. Maybe someone should ask him about that. I remember him saying how proud he was that his fag lover was in the army and I don't think this new on is the same so maybe everytime he runs for something he's in a new town, with a new dick swallower, and a new party.

Posted by: doug at October 23, 2006 5:59 PM

What ever happened to seperation of church and state? How Daryl chooses to live his life has no bearing on whether he is a good candidate or not. The real question is who will do the best job in office. I am a long time friend of Daryl, and seeing all this negativity is rediculous. Whoever started this rumor of 9/11 and he not being at Ground Zero should get there facts straight. Daryl was at his office when the planes struck and immediately when to Ground Zero. He arrived as the second plane struck, and was close enough to have pieces of the plane land around him. He has never misrepresented that story. I find it appauling that this day in age, we concentrate on all the negatives in politics, rather than the positives. Get over your moral issues and vote for the best candidate.

Posted by: Bryan R at November 4, 2006 9:28 AM