The Church clearly teaches there is just and unjust discrimination. She also teaches homosexual inclination is not the same as race or gender. She also teaches the inclination evokes moral concern. She also teaches not all rights are absolute and some can be curtailed based on certain criteria.
The doctor can answer questions within the context of his/her religion, and answer them in the same manner regardless of sexual preference.
Catholic doctors cannot perform IVF. If a person asks about it, the doctor can state he does not perform it, regardless of sexual preference.
You should be aware that cases are tried in California for a reason: They have the most liberal judges in the country, and you are virtually guaranteed a liberal outcome.
Said doctors may practice as they choose, no IVF, no service (preventative care, general exams) to lesbians (although that within itself is so wrong, based on the fact that the patient is a lesbian)…they should put a sign on their door, that they do not accept medicare, or medicaid patients. Some doctors do not due to the massive amounts of paperwork involved. That would solve the over zealous Catholic doctor’s dilemma.Well, in that country, I am pretty sure that in some states, refusing to place children in homosexual households is also considered flat-out discrimination. What some secularists consider as discrimination does not carry any weight when it comes to Catholicism.
But please tell me, how can a Catholic doctor really discuss pregnancy options with 2 lesbians for instance?
If doctors don’t deal with IVF who does then? I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say here.
There was a case of some doctors in California who were sued for refusing to provide this service to a lesbian. The doctors said they don’t provide the service to heterosexuals either. But the California Supreme Court accused them of discrimination. That antidiscrimination laws take precedence over their 1st Amendment rights.
Leftists will continue in their mission of attacking religious freedom. Some Catholics unfortunately will sympathise with them in the name of antidiscrimination. In places like Canada and Massachusetts for instance, I understand they even have laws that basically prevent people from voicing their opposing to same sex relationships in the name of bullying or hate speech.
Some people pretty much fail to see the bigger picture of this so called “discrimination”.
Very good example.
This is like a Catholic doctor counselling 2 lesbians on getting pregnant. I don’t believe they should do that.
Thanks.
Implicit in your statements is that the lesbians are asking questions that violate Catholic doctrine and the doctor must cede to those requests. That doesn’t necessarily have to be the case.
This was in response to someone saying that businesses should be able to do whatever they want. Therefore the question was relevant and logical.
From your response, it appears that you do not understand what I am saying. In the case of doctors refusing certain services, they are not services that they offer to anyone. They are not advertised services that the doctor provides. In the case of a hotel owner, a room is what they provide, to everyone. That is the difference to me in this case.
If the doctor offers fertility services they would offer them to the lesbians I am quite sure. If they do not, they would not.
We know that not all hotel owners provide their services to everyone.
I wonder whether you were also sure before each of all those lawsuits that the persons in question provided their services to all.
You have to think these things through. What if, say, the spouse of a Catholic mother was killed. Should the doctor not take her as a patient because she is single?
Wow, what a comparison. The Church does not teach that it is sinful to be a widow or single.
What I don’t understand is why ‘discrimination’ is okay for some of you in ‘private spheres’ but not in ‘public arenas’. Can you define a religious arena? Some people believe that religion should only be practiced in a Church building or at home but not in public like at a university.
That’s likely because the legal systems in the U.S. and Germany are not the same.
It doesn’t matter what people think, it matters what the legal precedence in the matter is. Different rules apply to different situations, such as private individuals to private individuals, religious or private organizations not dealing with the public, religious or private organization dealing with the public, whether the organizations receives public funding, etc. There can also be issues if a person in a private/religious organization holds a public license. All of these details play into the level of discrimination permitted.
Private and religious entities, and public entities, are handled entirely differently under the law. If you really are interested, it’s best to do some major reading on the subject, since you’ll have to start from the ground up because of the difference in the legal systems.
The Church also does not teach that it is sinful for anyone to be single, regardless of sexual orientation. So the single-parent argument is moot.
Then you likely would not provide fertility services at all, as many of those go against Church teaching. So again, moot point.
The answer is simple, if the “Catholic” business owner deals with the “public”, employees and or customers, follows “business license laws”, “minimum wage laws”, “does quarterly taxes” and most important, if that “business owner” received a grant, subsidy, loan from the FED GOV…said business owner cannot discriminate, period.