I've been trying to make the point that it's one thing to deny service based on behavior and another to deny service to a whole category of people.
This is one of those issues that really separates people in some deep way. A person who would decline to provide service to someone on the basis of their sex, race, straight/gay status, religion is so.... other to me, in the realm of deciding what is decent, humane behavior, that it's like they're a Martian.
A question for some (not you) would be: Would this doctor who would deny treatment to gays deny it to a priest he thought was probably a homosexual (but probably a celibate one; that is, one whose sexual thoughts involve males, and masturbatory fantasies involve males, but who -- the doctor believes -- doesn't have partners)?
How about a pediatrician who guesses that a nine year old boy is gay, that is, is clearly destined to be gay. Should he wait until the child reaches puberty to refuse to treat him, or is it okay to turn him away because the kid is extremely effeminate and the boy's mother is considering sending him to private school because she has been sure since he was three (for good reason) that he was going to be gay, and he is already being tormented mercilessly at school, being called a faggot, etc.? |
