Goodbye Religious Freedom

[KMAN]

Americans for Truth California Supreme Court Rules Against Christian Doctors Who Refused to Artificially Inseminate Lesbian

 

[dilloduck]

Americans for Truth California Supreme Court Rules Against Christian Doctors Who Refused to Artificially Inseminate Lesbian

Well---it IS California. I wouldn't expect less .

 

[AllieBaba]

Why the hell don't the lesbos just get lesbo doctors to do the procedure? I mean, it isn't like it's that rare or difficult a procedure, in and of itself.....

 

[AllieBaba]

Or just get Jerry Garcia sperm and use a turkey baster? I hear there's gallons of it stored somewhere...

 

[Article 15]

Hmmm ... a sensitive issue ... the doctors did pay for a referral to a doctor that didn't have an issue with performing the procedure ... but on the other hand you have doctors using their faith as a reason to discriminate against a group of people ... it's like opening a restaurant with a sign outside saying "No Gay's Allowed."

 

[AllieBaba]

Bullshit. It's like asking the proprietor of a Hassidic Jewish establishment to serve up pork with cream sauce.

There are doctors who don't object. Trying to force people to do things they find morally objectionable is tryanny, and it's bullshit.

 

[Article 15]

Bullshit. It's like asking the proprietor of a Hassidic Jewish establishment to serve up pork with cream sauce.

There are doctors who don't object. Trying to force people to do things they find morally objectionable is tryanny, and it's bullshit.

No it's not ... the owner of the Jewish establishment just need not put that on the menu ... in this case the doctors serve the pork cream sauce ... just not to the gays.

 

[AllieBaba]

Hmmmm.....

I can see the problem if there were no other doctors to perform the procedure, if it was a life or death situation. But for this, I think it's frivolous. Doctors who artificially inseminate women should (and do, I believe) have some degree of leeway in determining who they consider proper candidates and who they don't. I mean, isn't that part of their job? Determining if they should inseminate? Don't they interview patients? It isn't like they have to artificially inseminate every person who comes through the door and says that's what they want. I believe that they go through a process...and if at the end they determine they don't want to take this patient, I think that's a doctor's perogative. They can refer them to someone else, or just tell them no.

They aren't slaves, for pete's sakes. Even plastic surgeons determine who they will and who they won't work on, using a variety of criteria.

 

[AllieBaba]

Besides which, do you REALLY want a doctor who doesn't want to be working on you for whatever reason forced to work on you anyway?

I sure as heck don't. I think it's idiotic.

 

[dilloduck]

Or just get Jerry Garcia sperm and use a turkey baster? I hear there's gallons of it stored somewhere...

The lesbos just need the cash. McDonalds better take notice and make sure they serve them only warm coffee

 

[midcan5]

I think as citizens we owe our allegiance to the principles that guide civic affairs. If the doctor wants to practice in a religious nation or a Christian only hospital so be it but so long we all pay for and support schools/doctors/hospitals their civic duty should come before their religious beliefs. Religion has no place in this situation and the doctor is discriminating against an American citizen. Rights come before religion in the public arena.

 

[AllieBaba]

I think as citizens we owe our allegiance to the principles of individual freedom and freedom of religion.

So long as doctors are expected to use their professional ability to screen patients, they get to deny whomever they like for whatever purpose they like, when it comes to elective procedures.

 

[Care4all]

I think as citizens we owe our allegiance to the principles that guide civic affairs. If the doctor wants to practice in a religious nation or a Christian only hospital so be it but so long we all pay for and support schools/doctors/hospitals their civic duty should come before their religious beliefs. Religion has no place in this situation and the doctor is discriminating against an American citizen. Rights come before religion in the public arena.

really midcan?

FREEDOM of religion IS OUR FIRST RIGHT, given to all of us in the Bill of rights...in the public square,

so where does your statement that i made boldface fit in? please explain how you came to that conclusion when the bill of rights protects such?

care

 

[Anguille]

really midcan?

FREEDOM of religion IS OUR FIRST RIGHT, given to all of us in the Bill of rights...in the public square,

so where does your statement that i made boldface fit in? please explain how you came to that conclusion when the bill of rights protects such?

care

These doctors had no more right to discriminate against lesbians than do pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control or day after pills.

 

[Care4all]

These doctors had no more right to discriminate against lesbians than do pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control or day after pills.

I'm not certain on that....to force them to do something that they are religiously against doing, would be violating the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights imo....they have the right to their religious stances in the Public square according to the Bill of Rights and our government including the Supreme court which is part of the government does not have the power to take that away from them, is the way the First amendment reads, again, in my opinion....but it seems pretty clear...



care

 

[Anguille]

I'm not certain on that....to force them to do something that they are religiously against doing, would be violating the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights imo....they have the right to their religious stances in the Public square according to the Bill of Rights and our government including the Supreme court which is part of the government does not have the power to take that away from them, is the way the First amendment reads, again, in my opinion....but it seems pretty clear...



care

If they wish to have a license to practice medicine or to dispense prescription drugs, they need to respect the diversity of our nation and refrain from discrimination.

 

[Glori.B]

I'm not certain on that....to force them to do something that they are religiously against doing, would be violating the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights imo....they have the right to their religious stances in the Public square according to the Bill of Rights and our government including the Supreme court which is part of the government does not have the power to take that away from them, is the way the First amendment reads, again, in my opinion....but it seems pretty clear...



care

let individuals take their stance.

as long as the procedure is not prohibited and thus will be provided by someone else who has a different stance...why not?

 

[Anguille]

I wonder if the doctors refused to do procedures on blacks or on whites or on Catholics or on some other protected minority if they would have so much support.

 

[Glori.B]

I wonder if the doctors refused to do procedures on blacks or on whites or on Catholics or on some other protected minority if they would have so much support.

i can see how you might think that is an excellent point until you realize that we are talking about a particular medical procedure not necessarily who is having that procedure.

 

[Article 15]

i can see how you might think that is an excellent point until you realize that we are talking about a particular medical procedure not necessarily who is having that procedure.

Huh?