Today's Wall Street Journal has a disturbing story about a church deemed too risky for property insurance because it supports gay rights. The reason cited by the carrier is that taking a controversial position backing same-sex marriage and ordination of homosexuals means there's a greater threat of property damage and litigation against the church. Is this sound underwriting or homophobia? I would guess the latter. How about you?

The story involves the West Adrian United Church of Christ in Adrian, Mich. The carrier that took a pass on the account is Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company of Fort Wayne, Ind., which reportedly serves about 30,000 houses of worship in 29 states and Washington, D.C.

(I would like to link you to the news story on which this blog is based, but you would need to be a Wall Street Journal subscriber to access it. The story, “Insurer Judges A Church's Stance As Too Risky,” appears on page A8 of the Jan. 8 edition.)

The good news is that the church involved hasn't been left bare. It was able to renew its coverage with Safeco.

But like any good risk manager, the church was doing its due diligence on coverage, shopping around in a softening market for a better deal. They approached an agent for Brotherhood Mutual, and were handed a risk-assessment questionnaire that included queries about the institution's stance on same-sex marriage and ordination of gays–along with other questions, including whether the church endorsed or affiliated with organizations that were in favor of racial or ethnic discrimination or the use of violence for political or social change.

The latter questions seem reasonable to me, but to reject out of hand a church that guarantees equal rights for all citizens regardless of sexual orientation feels wrong and unjust, even though regulators reportedly say the carrier is within its legal rights.

What disgusts me about this is that the insurer wouldn't even offer a quote. It's not as if they said, well, you appear to be a riskier account, given your social positions on gay rights, so we'll have to charge you X when we might have charged you Y had you taken less controversial stands. But the insurer essentially said we don't want your business at any price because of where you stand.

Luckily, not all church specialists feel so queasy writing houses of worship that welcome all without prejudice. The Journal reported that Church Mutual Insurance Company of Merrill, Wis., and GuideOne Insurance of West Des Moines, Iowa, do not ask about how a facility treats gays as part of the underwriting process.

It's ironic that religious institutions have often been blasted for their narrow-minded and mean-spirited prejudice against society's minorities. Here we have a courageous and kind house of worship that does not close its doors to anyone, callously being shown the door by a shortsighted insurer.

Hopefully, given all the bad publicity it is likely to receive in forums like this, Brotherhood Mutual will soon see the light.

Special Reports /

Separation Of Church & Insurer

Related Stories

Recommended For You