A manager at a Massachusetts retail store claims he was unjustly fired after he told a colleague he thought her impending marriage to another woman was wrong.We have been told over and over by gay-rights activists that legalizing same-sex marriage will not hurt heterosexuals or those whose deeply-held religious beliefs teach that homosexual acts are gravely morally evil at all. Do not believe it; it is a lie. The end-game is to force societal approval of same-sex marriage. If a homosexual male co-worker "marries" another man, or if a homosexual female co-worker "marries" another woman, all of his or her fellow employees will be expected to offer the same level of congratulations they would be expected to offer if a man in the office marries a woman. Refusing to comment at all, even choosing to remain silent, will not be tolerated; it will be called "harassment," and the offender will be punished.
Peter Vadala, 24, told FoxNews.com he was terminated in August from his position as second deputy manager at a Brookstone store at Boston's Logan Airport after a conversation he had with a manager from another Brookstone store who was visiting the location.
Vadala claims the woman, whom he declined to identify, mentioned four times that she had married her partner. He said he then left the store briefly to visit the airport's chapel before returning.
"I found it offensive that she repeatedly brought it up," Vadala said. "By the fourth time she mentioned it, I felt God wanted me to express how I felt about the matter, so I did. But my tone was downright apologetic. I said, 'Regarding your homosexuality, I think that's bad stuff.'"
The woman, according to Vadala, then said, "Human resources, buddy — keep your opinions to yourself," before exiting the store.
Two days later, Vadala, who had been employed for just a matter of weeks, received a termination letter citing the company's zero-tolerance policy regarding "harassment" and "inappropriate and unprofessional" comments.
"In the state of Massachusetts, same-sex marriage is legal and there will be people with whom you work with who have fiancées or spouses who are the same gender," the Aug. 12 letter read. "... While you are entitled to your own beliefs, imposing them upon others in the workplace is not acceptable and in this case, by telling a colleague that she is deviant and immoral, constitutes discrimination and harassment."Vadala disputes using the words "deviant" and "immoral" during conversations with human resources employees on the matter.
If it is the custom in the office for co-workers to throw a wedding shower for an engaged couple, and a Catholic man or Muslim woman refuses to attend such a shower for a same-sex couple, the religious person will be the one who suffers for that decision. Even if the religious person doesn't make an issue of his or her non-attendance, but simply skips the event, there will likely be repercussions. No disapproval, not even silent disapproval, will be tolerated.
Some might say, "What's the difference between congratulating a same-sex couple on their engagement, or buying them a gift for an engagement party, and doing the same for an opposite sex couple one or both of whom has been divorced? Neither one is a real marriage, in the Church's eyes, so why should a Catholic be able to condone one and not the other?" The difference, of course, is that a Catholic may offer some muted congratulations to a divorced person who is "remarrying" because the Catholic person has no way to know whether the first marriage was valid or not. It is possible that the marriage this man and woman are about to enter will be valid. It is even possible that, should the couple become Catholic, the Church will agree--or will discuss with the couple what is needed for a valid marriage, should that be possible. It is not up to the individual lay Catholic to hold a personal marriage tribunal over marriages which may presumptively be valid, and provided his offer of congratulations or appearance at a company celebration will not give scandal he may, I think, prudently consider one or both of these actions.
The situation is quite different in the case of a same-sex couple who is getting "married." There is no possible way, now or ever, that such a marriage will be valid in the eyes of the Church, or be something of which God approves. The Church will never allow such "marriages" for her spiritual children, and any Catholic who in any way seems to approve of, condone, participate in celebrating, or otherwise acquiesce in such "marriages" does so at the risk of giving scandal. No question of presumptive validity is possible here--same-sex "marriages" are not marriages at all, but a social engineering sham designed to force public acceptance and approval of homosexual acts, which are gravely morally evil.
In our secular society, though, a Catholic's refusal to celebrate the wedding plans of a same-sex colleague will be called "harassment," and will be considered punishable. There will be no tolerance from the same-sex activist side; there will be no religious freedom, there will not even be freedom of speech or association. Enforced approval and celebration of homosexual activity will be more important than any of these, and anyone who doesn't show acceptable levels of these will be marginalized and excluded from society.
The warning signs are clear. Should same-sex marriage become the law of the land, no person who is a member of a religious faith which agrees with the Church that homosexual acts are gravely morally evil will be free to express that deeply-held belief without serious consequences.