Some of them would probably approve of treating a rapist for herpes but deny the rape victim an abortion. They would probably approve of providing care for a man accused of domestic assault or child abuse but deny his wife birth control.
Can't make 'em bake cakes for LBGT people because of religious or ethical beliefs. Why would they make a doctor treat a LBGT person?
Some of them would probably approve of treating a rapist for herpes but deny the rape victim an abortion. They would probably approve of providing care for a man accused of domestic assault or child abuse but deny his wife birth control. I would think denying anyone health insurance or healthcare is a different scenario entirely. It's bad enough millions can't even afford healthcare in this country. Then, you have some religious bigot making it legal for others to legally deny people healthcare based on their own moral code. Can you imagine what's next? Will he start allowing neighborhoods to discriminate from allowing certain groups to buy or rent homes based on religious beliefs? I just don't see how a state can legally refuse to treat others based on their religious beliefs in the US.
The state isn't refusing to treat anyone. I posted the text of the bill. All it does is allow individuals to not violate their own ethical or moral standards. There is no state action at all. It is a protection of individual liberty.
The GOP spits on Veterans and unites with power hungry seditionists and traitors. Their top candidate is a lying POS traitor. They plead the 5th for his lying sorry ass. They are the opposite of Patriots! They are fake Patriots.
That's your interpretation. They can refuse to treat LGBGT patients if they deem it against their moral standards. You call that liberty, but the patients should not be denied because some doctor doesn't seem their morals up to his standards. I say the doctors should be the ones who have the freedom to find another line of work. Imagine if every business owner could refuse people who had morals different than them.
That's your interpretation. They can refuse to treat LGBGT patients if they deem it against their moral standards. You call that liberty, but the patients should not be denied because some doctor doesn't seem their morals up to his standards. I say the doctors should be the ones who have the freedom to find another line of work. Imagine if every business owner could refuse people who had morals different than them. You guys would be lining up to buy Whites Only signs or NO FAGS Allowed signs huh?
Some people would love to go back in time when "certain humans" were treated like animals or deprived of the same rights as other Americans legally.
They would just be shuffled along to another doctor who didn't have a moral or ethical objection. Shouldn't they have the freedom to still be a doctor, but not do things they think are wrong? We let soldiers do that. We let lawyers do that. I don't know what kind of plumbing someone could do that they would morally object to, but I would think that can refuse as well. Why not doctors? People could choose who to do business with or not? Sounds great. I would have no use for such a sign, but any business owner that feels that way should be allowed to have such a policy.
I'm done debating with you. I'm disgusted with your views. I am never going to think it's fine to discriminate against others. Im putting you on ignore. Reading your responses makes me feel like I'm conversing with some clan member or right wing extremist. It gives me the creeps.
Didn't you already have me on ignore because you can't handle people who disagree with you? It would be great for producers who don't want to do business with someone.
I would greatly appreciate businesses that put No Blacks or No Fags signs on their front door. My consumer dollars can be spent elsewhere.
And what if the market is racist and prevents Black families from being able to get mortgages because the market is racist? What about essential services like rent?
Maybe we should end the pretense and simply allow everyone the freedom to choose who and what they will sell to and provide services to? Then that so-called free market will work itself out. Don't like people of a different race? Heck, they can find someone that will treat them. Don't like people of different religions? There are other doctors that will. Don't like women... I am sure there are plenty of doctors that do. After all, why hold doctors and other health providers to a different standard?
Exactly - do we really want a world where HEB or Reliant refuse to provide service to certain demographics because “freedom”?
