Why are you so full of hate?
There are common carrier laws which require, for example, taxi cabs to pick up all passengers. Businesses work under the concept that they cannot discriminate without sufficient cause. It is too easy to say that someone has 'religious' objections against providing a hotel room for a mixed race couple. We've been there before, who the heck wants to go back?
In the same way, if you are going to be engaged in a public business under regulation or license from the public, you should act in an appropriate manner regardless of your private views.
If your views are an example of your religion, your religion sucks. Why don't you find a better one, there are an endless number on offer and you can even make up your own.
If a doctor does not want to perform sex change operations then he/she shouldn't be a sex change operation surgeon. Why is this an issue? Stop making up silly examples that don't exist in the real world.
"Nothing about serving a meal to someone involves doing something immoral in someone's religion."
Nonsense. People could easily object to serving meat.
"Although you and your fellow liberals here would want to push those pharmacists out of business."
What? You are repeating what I said about getting someone else to dispense the objectionable pill. It isn't an ideal situation and an employer could certainly fire the pharmacist for failing to do his/her job. Are you actually reading what I wrote or are you just having a knee jerk reaction.
"a lesbian sued a doctor for referring her to another doctor to provide in vitro fertilization services. And won thanks to the extremist CA Supreme Court"
Where is the link to this? What was the suit based on and what was the decision based on? If you are saying that a woman without a man cannot have a service that a woman with a man can, that is discrimination. Is it based on that or based on her being gay? Exactly what right does the doctor have to make judgments about her outside of MEDICAL judgments?
Are you saying you would be fine with doctors refusing to provide Viagra to men over 55 because they believe it is morally indefensible to have sex with no intention of having children with their wives? Where does it end?
So, you are fine with a doctor performing an abortion to save a mother's life. Why isn't that against your religion? An abortion is an abortion isn't it or do you have specific rules for when an abortion can be performed without being an affront to God? How about in the case of rape or incest? How about if the 'mother' to be is under age? How about if the 'mother' to be has no visible means of support for herself and cannot support the baby and the baby has no realistic chance of being adopted?
What are your rules and who made those rules?
If you can make rules about abortions and birth control and the like, I can certainly make rules about whom I believe to be nincompoops. Most people are religious and most people are reasonably rational. Those freaks who try and kill doctors who provide abortions or who rail about gays adopting or having children are idiots.
So, you acknowledge that a Christian Scientist shouldn't be a doctor (they can set bones I believe) but you refuse to say that an overly religious person should be and that the medical profession should kow tow to the specific religious requirements of that doctor? Why? Why is a Christian Scientist a different religious example?
Radical secularist? What the heck is that?
Agnostics or, OMG (!!!), atheists would not have to leave the medical profession since that profession is not a religious one. If atheists wanted to be employed by a church, the church shouldn't have to kowtow to his/her beliefs either.
If religious doctors do not want to perform abortions or provide birth control, they should stay away from those specialties or find some way around the problem that does not involve failure to provide medically acceptable services to their customers. |
