Fr. James Martin SJ reacted to a major U.S. Supreme Court religious liberty case pitting so-called homosexual rights against a Catholic adoption agency’s conscience rights, siding with LGBT activists and a host of far-left organizations.

When court observers yesterday suggested that a majority of the nine justices had signaled they would rule in favor of the Catholic child welfare agency, Martin lamented that choosing not to place foster kids with homosexual couples is “homophobia.”

“Religious liberty should not be used as a cover for homophobia,” Martin tweeted.

The Jesuit then went on to repeat his usual argument, suggesting that “‘religious liberty’ exemptions are focused only on LGBT people and the only ‘church teaching’ that seems to matter has to do with same-sex marriage.”

“Do Catholic adoption agencies also seek to exclude couples who are Jewish or Protestant?” he asked.  “They too are not ‘following church teaching,’ in one case by not believing in Jesus. Why focus only on same-sex couples?”

Martin continued in a string of subsequent Tweets:

To be clear: Catholic institutions and agencies have the right to require their employees to follow church teachings, and the right to decide whom they serve and under what conditions. But increasingly “religious liberty” exemptions are focused only on LGBT people and the only “church teaching” that seems to matter has to do with same-sex marriage. There are many other important church teachings that adoptive couples are probably not following, and there is no exemption sought by Catholic social service agencies.

The same selectivity applies when LGBT employees are fired for not “supporting or conveying church teaching” (in the words of one archdiocese). Yet many church employees do not “support or convey church teaching,” in other areas, and are not similarly targeted or fired.

As a thought exercise: When it comes to adoptions, why don’t Catholic agencies seek a legal exemption so as not to be required to place children with Jewish couples? I am not arguing for that at all, just pointing out the inconsistency in the application of ‘church teaching.’

It raises the question: Is believing in Jesus Christ not as an important a value [sic]  for families? No, increasingly the only “religious liberty” issue in these cases seems to be the freedom to target, exclude and discriminate against LGBT people, whether in employment or adoption.

This selectivity of application of “church teaching” seems clearly discriminatory.

Martin’s statement firmly plants him in the same camp as a few dozen secular far-left organizations supporting the City of Philadelphia against Catholic Social Services, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, the National LGBTQ Task Force, the National Organization for Women Foundation, the Feminist Majority Foundation, and the AFL-CIO.

“If we are honest about what is really going on here, it’s not about ensuring that same-sex couples in Philadelphia have the opportunity to be foster parents,” observed conservative  Justice Samuel Alito, during yesterday’s oral arguments concerning Fulton v. Philadelphia.

“It’s the fact the city can’t stand the message that Catholic Social Services and the Archdiocese are sending by continuing to adhere to the old-fashioned view about marriage,” asserted Alito….

The above comes from a Nov. 5 story on LifeSiteNews.