Refusing Service on Religious Grounds

[TheWarriorMonk]

My point is that you have a simplistic understanding,

Actually, I hold my multiple state-issued licenses and am familiar with laws pertaining to those professions (including those pertaining to discrimination). To make such a statement, I will assume you are an attorney.

of the choices any private party has with regard to serving the public.

“Private party” is a misnomer. A state-licensed doctor is not a private party.

A provider can limit services, and can limit the population he/she serves, for all kinds of reasons. I provided the example of the OB-GYN because age discrimination is a frequent civil rights complaint, and I am telling you that businesses whose focus accidentally results in discrimination by age, sexual orientation, marital status, and even gender (when not a gender-specific business, such as NOT an OB-GYN) are protected by the fact that they announce first of all whom they are serving, exclusively, and secondly by informal, unpublished choices they make.

But not a single example you have given deals with a protected class; you are referring to types of services. Limiting one’s type of services is not discrimination.

Smart providers do not announce what they limit, if they believe those limits will be challenged, and I definitely support such decisions on their part. And I’m sorry, but if you think they do not get away that, then your experience is, I believe, much more limited than mine.

Once again, limiting one’s services in not discrimination. If you are arguing that doctors are covertly discriminating against protected classes because they can get away with it, your argument is going to fall on deaf ears.

Simply, “I don’t have the capacity for more customers/clients at this time” covers a whole host of reasons.

Turning down work because one is busy is not discrimination. I do that all the time. However, I don’t turn down work because people are lesbians or some of the other reasons that you seem to be implying.

Another example: Supposing an OB-GYN had in fact occasionally done IVF and other fertility procedures for straight couples, and that same doctor has a single lesbian for a patient (has had for some time), who announced one day that she wanted to be inseminated with his professional assistance. He could simply tell her that in his professional medical opinion, insemination for her would not be a good idea, and he could not be party to that. However, he could refer her to other providers who might provide that.

The way you phrased it is not discrimination under the law.

Of course, the paragraph above is not entirely realistic. Why? Because normally homosexuals, both single and coupled, specifically seek out “gay-friendly” providers. Lesbians in particular prefer female Ob-Gyns, often because they don’t trust men, often because they consider female providers more friendly to them, more trustworthy, and sometimes with an interest in “rewarding” (supporting) “gay-friendly” providers. There are official lists of these on various websites in those communities.

I’ve actually had to deal with a situation involving someone that called our office specifically looking for a gay person in my profession to help him. I cannot do that under the law, and flat-out told him that. I stated if he wants I can provide him with highly competent persons that can help him, which I ended up doing. Problem solved, no discrimination; it’s easier that you think. No dancing around trying to figure out ways to get around the law.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Once again, limiting one’s services in not discrimination. If you are arguing that doctors are covertly discriminating against protected classes because they can get away with it, your argument is going to fall on deaf ears.

Well, you’re wrong. I know of many, many situations in which all kinds of providers (including but not limited to professionals) are using one kind of excuse (time, specialty, whatever to keep them from having to provide services they choose not to provide, regardless of how anyone may or may not be “a protected class.” The fact tha you know of no such situations like that is neither here nor there. It does happen. Period. Have a nice day.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Well, you’re wrong. I know of many, many situations in which all kinds of providers (including but not limited to professionals) are using one kind of excuse (time, specialty, whatever to keep them from having to provide services they choose not to provide, regardless of how anyone may or may not be “a protected class.” The fact tha you know of no such situations like that is neither here nor there. It does happen. Period. Have a nice day.

I never said stated that people don’t act unethically. People act unethically all the time. However, just because they can act unethically and get away with it does not mean their poor behavior is justified. In my main profession, there were a whole lot of people that acted unethically in the past. Of course, the law caught up with them, and most are gone. Furthermore it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

In the context of Catholicism, the Church treats everyone equally, and expects others to do the same. If you have any official Church statements to the contrary, I’m interested in reading them. As an example as it pertains to this issue, a doctor should, say, deny IVF to anyone; lesbian or otherwise. The doctor should deny tying one’s tubes, lesbian or otherwise, etc. The doctor should not be denying people because of some characteristics that they may have very well been born with.

That is the moral Catholic path, and that is how the Church handles such issues.

 

[kelvinf]

You have no been reading my posts correctly. I have never said that the doctor should give advice in conflict with the doctor’s religion. I have effectively said the the doctor should give the same ethical advice to anyone walking in the door, regardless of who they are. Once you start giving different advice to people because they have certain characteristics, that is blatant discrimination, can cost you a few million dollars, result in your license being pulled, and put you out of business.

You are contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you say that the doctor shouldn’t give advice in conflict with his beliefs. On the other hand, you say that he shouldn’t discriminate. Again, the two don’t go together.

 

[kelvinf]

I just don’t see this being a real scenario. The only way that a lesbian couple could do anything pregnancy related would be with fertility services so they would go to a doctor that works in that area to discuss pregnancy issues.

It is a very real situation but you are ignoring some basics. Even if your health system is different, I am pretty sure there are some basic things all doctors do.

2 lesbians want to get pregnant and have no idea on how to go about that. They would consult with a doctor – a general practitioner for instance. It is up to this doctor to inform them about the various possibilities and probably refer them to a hospital or specialist. As I said before, not all (Catholic) doctors would provide this consultation because that would be helping 2 lesbians to get pregnant and raise a child; something that is contrary to our beliefs.

 

[kelvinf]

I never said stated that people don’t act unethically. People act unethically all the time. However, just because they can act unethically and get away with it does not mean their poor behavior is justified. In my main profession, there were a whole lot of people that acted unethically in the past. Of course, the law caught up with them, and most are gone. Furthermore it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

In the context of Catholicism, the Church treats everyone equally, and expects others to do the same. If you have any official Church statements to the contrary, I’m interested in reading them. As an example as it pertains to this issue, a doctor should, say, deny IVF to anyone; lesbian or otherwise. The doctor should deny tying one’s tubes, lesbian or otherwise, etc. The doctor should not be denying people because of some characteristics that they may have very well been born with.

That is the moral Catholic path, and that is how the Church handles such issues.

This is false. The Catholic Church has demonstrated time and again that people who engage in certain immoral behaviours cannot hold certain roles in religious and even public institutions.

The Church has rules and regulations. People who violate certain rules do not get the same treatment. A very simple example is receiving communion.
So your statement above is inaccurate.

 

[kelvinf]

I agree, but Catholicism also says that we must follow the legitimate laws of government. Government says that we cannot discriminate, so until you are at the point of cooperation in a sinful act, I think you need to follow the law. I think the real question being asked is at what point are you cooperating in sin.

That is not accurate. The Church teaches that we should obey only those laws that are just–laws that are not contrary to our religious beliefs. We don’t follow everything that leftist governments dictate. Laws contrary to our beliefs can never be legitimate.
They believe it is discrimination for the Church not to allow women to be priests for instance but they haven’t yet gone as far as to take action on that. What some government defines as discrimination is not necessarily discrimination.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

You are contradicting yourself.

No. Please point out where I an contradicting myself.

On the one hand, you say that the doctor shouldn’t give advice in conflict with his beliefs.

A doctor not providing, say, IVF services to a lesbian because the doctor does not provide IVF services to anyone since it not discrimination. I have not stated, thus you cannot point out, an example where the doctor must provide services against his faith.

On the other hand, you say that he shouldn’t discriminate. Again, the two don’t go together.

Are you stating the the doctor should discriminate against someone solely because they are a lesbian? Even the Church doesn’t do that.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

That is not accurate. The Church teaches that we should obey only those laws that are just–laws that are not contrary to our religious beliefs.

Treating a lesbian with the same respect is not contrary to any Catholic belief I am aware of. If it is, please provide such documentation. It is very easy not to discriminate. In the case at hand, the doctor might not be able to provide any services to the lesbian after consultation. That’s because the doctor doesn’t provide those services she asks for…and the doctor doesn’t provide to anyone else either because they are against his faith. That’s not discrimination.

You are implying that the doctor must provide services against his faith because the patient is a lesbian. That’s not the law, and that’s not what I said. Please read more carefully.

 

[fix]

I never said stated that people don’t act unethically. People act unethically all the time. However, just because they can act unethically and get away with it does not mean their poor behavior is justified. In my main profession, there were a whole lot of people that acted unethically in the past. Of course, the law caught up with them, and most are gone. Furthermore it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

In the context of Catholicism, the Church treats everyone equally, and expects others to do the same. If you have any official Church statements to the contrary, I’m interested in reading them. As an example as it pertains to this issue, a doctor should, say, deny IVF to anyone; lesbian or otherwise. The doctor should deny tying one’s tubes, lesbian or otherwise, etc. The doctor should not be denying people because of some characteristics that they may have very well been born with.

That is the moral Catholic path, and that is how the Church handles such issues.

The Church does not let homosexual persons adopt children. A Catholic therapist would not counsel lesbians as in marriage counseling. So, the Church does support just discrimination.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

The Church does not let homosexual persons adopt children.

This is a different subject than I am addressing, but I will mention that the above is not true. If you stated that you are referring to an “openly practicing homosexual,” my answer would be different. The Church openly welcomes homosexuals, or anyone else, that has repented of their sins and lives chastely. Such people may adopt.

 

[fix]

This is a different subject than I am addressing, but I will mention that the above is not true. If you stated that you are referring to an “openly practicing homosexual,” my answer would be different. The Church openly welcomes homosexuals, or anyone else, that has repented of their sins and lives chastely. Such people may adopt.

This is not true. Being chaste is not the sole criterion. Two or more same sex persons posing as authentic parents is prohibited. Children have rights. They deserve a father and mother not two “fathers” acting like father and mother.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

The Church does not let homosexual persons adopt children. A Catholic therapist would not counsel lesbians as in marriage counseling. So, the Church does support just discrimination.

There are exceptions.

 

[Julianna]

So…would you be comfortable with a hotel owner telling heterosexual couples who are not married that they can not have sex in their hotel?
That is also a sin, yes?

Great point!!! and DG…how would the hotel clerk “know”? And is it any of the hotel clerk’s business, really?

How far are some going to take this? The bank you have patronized for years gives a mortgage to a homosexual couple who patronizing the same real estate firm that sold/or helped you buy your home, whose husband or wife owns the car dealership where you have purchased all of your cars, and this homosexual couple has the same name dealership on the back of their car… really? How far do you want to track back? Should gays/lesbians be rounded up and put in a colony of their own? This is getting beyond stupid.

Is it time to start looking for a cave or a fishbowl, so some can totally separate themselves from society?

 

[fix]

There are exceptions.

Sure, if said person no longer experiences deep seated attraction and marries a woman. Then you have an exception.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Sure, if said person no longer experiences deep seated attraction and marries a woman. Then you have an exception.

This is starting to get off topic, but this is false. Single Catholic parents adopt all the time, and some Catholic parents die before their children are adults. While the mother/father situation is ideal, the Church does not prohibit people from being single parents. The restrictions are generally limited to certain immoral situations. A single lesbian parent not in an immoral situation does not fall into that category.

 

[fix]

This is starting to get off topic, but this is false. Single Catholic parents adopt all the time, and some Catholic parents die before their children are adults. While the mother/father situation is ideal, the Church does not prohibit people from being single parents. The restrictions are generally limited to certain immoral situations. A single lesbian parent not in an immoral situation does not fall into that category.

You are quite wrong. Single parents can be fine under certain situations. " Gay" single parents are not in such a category.

Where does the Church offer adoption to " gay" singles?

 

[Edward_H]

If we have no choice, we still must love.

We can still perform acts of penance and reparation for people who go against God’s will and plan.

In fact, we must perform penance for them, out of love for them and out of love for God. Only God needs to know that we are doing this…and it’d be a good idea to let him or her know that we are taking on extra acts of reparation, and the reason why.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

You are quite wrong. Single parents can be fine under certain situations. " Gay" single parents are not in such a category.

Where does the Church offer adoption to " gay" singles?

Where does the Church state that single, chaste, homosexuals may not adopt? Not personal opinions, but official statements please.

 

[Edward_H]

Where does the Church state that single, chaste, homosexuals may not adopt? Not personal opinions, but official statements please.

So all the Catholic adoption agencies that are getting pressured to let homosexuals adopt from them are resisting it without a basis in Catholic theology.