N.J. Religious Group Found to Be Discriminating Against Lesbian Couple

like Jeff said, the special favors ie tax breaks indicate the Methodists there wanted it both ways, probably still getting the tax breaks also. This town is one hour from where I live, it is my favorite NJ shore town, and it just so happens to be the place my gf kissed me in public for the first time anywhere. I have a special love for the town, it really is beautiful. The gazebo is in this town, right on the boardwalk which is on the beach. The town was historically religious since it became a town. Now it is just a regular town.

I have a friend who works at a public school in NJ. He was telling me that their school is being sued by some church group for not posting a religious event on the school's newsletter. Apparently this group has sued other schools for the same reason as a way to raise money. I have been looking for more information about the story but haven't come across anything.

Apparently a number of Methodist ministers in the NJ area decided that they wanted to establish a permanent location where they could have retreats and seminars out by the beach, this was at some point in 1880s or 1870s. Anyway the Methodist Retreat Association owns virtually all of the land in Ocean Grove however they lease the land to the owners of any buildings on the site. Apparently the association had some very draconian policies - basically your typical blue code laws (laws based on religious values) for example they didn't permit shops to open on Sunday for a number of years. At one point some 20-30 years ago the town was mockingly called Ocean Grave instead of Ocean Grove. (no longer sure who or what I'm answering - time for a nap)

Can anyone tell me why churches need to own tax exempt beach front property???

I've read different explanations for this legal question about the Methodist Churches owning the Pavillion in this area over the last 2 yrs. Some in NJ paper and elsewhere. The beaches around this area not far from where the little religious town is, is owned by the state or else the county, and beaches are public domain. As I read before when they bought this area where the pavillion stands they knew that it had to be open to the public. It was used by everybody with no problem until two gay women wanted to have a civil marriiage there. They refused, and the couple appealed this. I just recently read that they have changed their requirements on their Pavillion use, and they are no longer using it for any marriages, even their own Methodist marriages. They can do this if noone is allowed to be married there, because they own the pavillion. They do not own the boardwalk or beaches.

It is about time we really sgtart looking at the tax exempt status of churches. Their tax free status in most countries is derived from the fact that churches will not interfere in government affairs. But churches today think it is their moral obligation to interfere with government policies. Maybe it is time we start forcing the government to look at all churches tax status as what they are doing is illegal under both the US and Canadian constitutions. How many billions in tax dollars am I supposed to pay to support these institutions whose only objective is take away my rights, They are not following any mandate from a higher power, but only their own bigotry. Biggest joke, recently the local presbyterian minister was revealed to be having affairs simultaneously with both a mother and her daughter, the daughter was only 17 when this affair started, she is 25 now. And this is the moral leadership we are supposed to take our guidance from.

As a minister you are all correct. It isn't about a church being forced to do something within its worship service or its practice of its faith, it is about a church declaring that a piece of property is for PUBLIC use and then treating it as if it is not. (i.e. denying a certain part of the public to use it) And it will be sad, as Richard notes, that the religious right is going to ignore this simple fact and paint it as the government stepping all over the church's rights.

The part of this that is going to be sad is the Church will state their civic rights are being voilated by stating religious group are being force to do Civic unions which is against their faith. But they really don't want anyone to look at the fact their were working the system for tax breaks and extra booking by calling it a public place. It's called HAVING YOUR CAKE AND EATING IT TOO! You can't have a building open for public use and then state which part of the public you want to use it. The worst part of all this is no ones sees the Church crying about their rights being stepped on, but they have done everything they could to step on our rights AND THEY KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT. Love to you all and Have a GAY DAY.

I am afraid the details of this story will be lost and the religious right will boil it down to "the government forced a church to allow gays to marry on their property even though the church was opposed to it. So we have to oppose gay marriage or you will have to open up your church to gay marriages."

TAX CHURCHES!