DISQUS

lucky hussein · 11 months ago

they should compromise - don't force an employee to fill the script, but only if someone else is there and doesn't mind. the store itself should have no authority. I don't care who owns it.

Gary SF · 11 months ago

I don't agree. Once we go down the path of picking and choosing, all is lost. What if someone was single and wanted to buy condoms or birth control pills? What if a gay man wanted to buy ANY medication? An divorced woman? How about someone who is an atheist? Sorry, we have anti-discrimination laws in this country that apply to all of us.

lucky hussein · 11 months ago

yeah, on second thought, i have to agree with you..

coolcatdaddy · 11 months ago

Since it applies to "health care workers", imagine how a conservative teaching hospital might interprete the rules in training interns or nurses.

This is a little executive order that needs to be nipped in the bud or there will be reams of litigation about it.

rodan32 · 11 months ago

Have you ever been denied treatment? Know someone who has?

Azarnes · 11 months ago

Yes. And every time it was a fundie pharmacist who refused birth control, refused Plan B, and in one case, a Catholic hospital that REFUSED to take out the (profoundly) diseased uterus that was killing a friend with the bleeding. Refused, and nearly killed her, becuase she was female, and in her 30's and unmarried, so the religious folks REFUSED her doctor's orders. Did I mention that they nearly killed her? Because she was female. Medical care as a female bodied person is a nightmare enough in this country, now we get these asshats denying us more medical care?

Professor_Farnsworth · 11 months ago

slippery slope.

if you can not do any part of your job, especially REFUSING to do your job, you should not be working in it.

Gary SF · 11 months ago

Let's see here. Millions of Americans with no health care insurance coverage. Millions more with coverage but can't afford treatment, especially pharmaceuticals. And then there is our 'rank' in the world - health wise that is - somewhere low on the list.

Since everything seems to be running smoothly, I can see why Bush can now take the time to implement laws like this. He is only trying to improve things. NOT.

Older_Wiser · 11 months ago

46th, I believe...

Patrick_Bateman · 11 months ago

Does this mean that if I was a health care professional I could refuse to treat military personnel because I believe that war is immoral?

If I believe I am serving a xtian fundie, could I refuse to assist? because morally I find most of them empty and repugnant?

Jesus! wake me when he's gone!

moreleesafer · 11 months ago

I had a friend in the military who was separated from his wife for about a year with no hope of getting back together He was about 50 at the time and having ED issues. The whole divorce thing was dragging out over a year or so. Meanwhile he entered into a relationship with another woman. He asked a military Dr. to prescribe Cialis. The Dr. knew of my friend's marital situation and my friend told him that he started a relationship with someone else since the marriage was over. The Dr. told my friend he could not prescribe the meds because he was morally opposed to adultery. They were both military and military Dr.s tend to be republican wingnuts. And technically, adultery is a punishable offense in the military. Even so, I felt this was ridiculous for the Dr. to refuse to treat my friend's issue on moral grounds. Eventually, my friend just went to another Dr. who did not know his marital situation and didn't volunteer the info. He prescribed the meds.

Older_Wiser · 11 months ago

That SOB. This is not just about pharmacists, John. I'll tell you what, I'm not young anymore, but at my age, if anyone refuses me care or any kind of Rx, I will sue the shit out of them for malpractice.

To give leave to uneducated, illiterate and ignorant "health care workers" who want to use their prejudices against ANYONE to refuse care is just downright evil, much less people with advanced degrees, who should know the hell better.

If these people don't want to do the job they were trained to do, let them go dig ditches.

Butch1 · 11 months ago

Sorry, this needs to go through Congress. If he is going to pontificate and make up his own laws, Congress show just go home, since they are not needed in this dictatorship.

rodan32 · 11 months ago

Yeah, funny - how on EARTH did Barack get elected? Why didn't Bush think to rig himself a third term?

Boycottutah · 11 months ago

Slightly OT: El Coyote Prop 8 Boycott worked!!! Business so bad, Marjorie the Mormon Bigot resigned.

http://laist.com/2008/12/08/el_coyote_manager_r...

Patrick_Bateman · 11 months ago

Bravo! Power to the people!

My Gov. Rod in Illinois has issued an order for the state to halt business with BofA effective immediately, and is supporting the sit-in at the Republics plant in Chicago.

We CAN move mountains, one stone at a time.

Older_Wiser · 11 months ago

There were protesters at BofA in Charlotte today...unfortunately, the local news stations are playing it down (one spent 7 minutes on the Panther/Tampa Bay game, though--shows you where the priorities are in Hicktown Charlotte).

rodan32 · 11 months ago

Good work! You forced someone you didn't agree with out of their livelihood, plus you were motivated by bigotry and anti-religious sentiment. You must be so proud.

Bostonian_Queer_in_Dallas · 11 months ago

Would someone please tell this little asshole that Jesus does not run the USA.

Dave of the Jungle · 11 months ago

And that Jesus himself thinks he's an asshole.

Bostonian_Queer_in_Dallas · 11 months ago

Roflmao

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

This is an executive order right? If so, it needs to be one of the first things Obama gets rid of.

Patrick_Bateman · 11 months ago

The article stated that it could take Obama 3 to 6 months to repeal.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

That's the part that confuses me. I was under the impression that any executive orders issued within the last sixty days could be immediately undone with another executive order.

Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago

not if finalized by Jan. 20. i think the 60 days refers to when the order must be proposed and put into the pipeline in order to be final by Jan. 20. it would appear this one has been in the works for a while.

Phil · 11 months ago

It can work both ways. Deny the really whacked out fundies their psyche meds, because they are whacked out fundies and watch what happens. This is a really terrible idea all around.

I imagine this will be one of the first rules repealed after Jan. 20. If you have moral objections to doing your job, at least in the real world, it means YOU ARE FIRED!

Ben · 11 months ago

Well, if this is so, simply go to another pharmacy or request another pharmacist. It's not like there are pharmacies on every block in this country with practically everyone on some sort medication. Let the religious fanatics keep this garbage up. Pretty soon no one will be going to their pharmacies and they'll go out of business and can open another business, or racket, which is what they're doing anyway with all this religious stupidity.

nicho · 11 months ago

That's all well and good if you live in the city. In some areas of the country, the WalMart pharmacy is the only one around and sometimes people have to drive a long time to get there. These are exactly the same areas where the religious nutjobs dominate. Sick people should not have to be bounding all over the county to get a legally prescribed drug.

Allan Ire · 11 months ago

I can envision that anti-choice/contraception hospital boards and anti-choice/contraception personnel departments could and would exclusively select anti-choice/contraception staff members thus denying any chance of patients having access to any contraception or pregnancy alternatives at any level in those institutions.

coolcatdaddy · 11 months ago

And I can see a patient in the middle of South Dakota somewhere suing (and winning) a case based on religious discrimination when they have to travel an undue distance to get a prescription filled.

I'm sorry - this is much like a business being able to put up a "No Jews Served Here" sign.

nicho · 11 months ago

The solution is simple -- a regulation requiring that the pharmacy provide all legally prescribed medication within a reasonable time and at no inconvenience to the customer. They can have all the religious nutjobs they want on their staff, but they must also have someone who WILL fill the prescription. If the pharmacy wants to double-staff to cater to the religious whims of their workers, let them. If the can't fill it right away, they must fill it within so many hours and then deliver it, at no cost, to the customer's home.

Problem will be solved very quickly, as religious nuts will find themselves with very few job offers. If you can't do everything the job requires, find another line of work. That's all.

Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago

not bad. this goes to the fitness of the employee to do the work, not their religious affiliation. firing is legal.

Tlazolteotl · 11 months ago

I think in that case, lawyers ought to be able to refuse to defend those they find objectionable, you know, like mass murderers and war criminals.

prodigal · 11 months ago

Or financiers.

prodigal · 11 months ago

No anti-depressants because if you'd just open your heart to Jesus you'd be filled with joy.
Helpful.

ChrisSF · 11 months ago

Or no psych meds of any kind because the pharmacist is a Scientologist!

PJT · 11 months ago

What the Hell ever happened to "first, do no harm?"

prodigal · 11 months ago

It's not in the Bible. Doesn't count.

Buford · 11 months ago

No Viagra or Cialis without a marriage certificate... just wait!

Shaolin Haggis · 11 months ago

If Marie Osmond faints on "Dancing with the Stars" and Lance Bass takes her to the the hospital are the wishes of the gay-hating Mormon doctor or the anti-dancing Baptist nurse followed. Forget for the moment if someone wished that Donnie would, "go break a leg", while prancing about in that rainbow inspired "Technicolor Dreamcoat'.

dula · 11 months ago

If a knuckle dragging "Christian" goes to a Gay Pharmacist wanting fertility drugs, the Gay Pharmacist can say he doesn't approve of the Christian lifestyle and refuses to enable them to breed their brand of ignorance into another generation.

Indigo · 11 months ago

That's the Bible-belt for you.

Guest · 11 months ago

sickening. the Bush administration will stop at nothing to destroy this once great nation.

this is one of the worst things I've seen Bush do, because it will affect lots of Americans negatively. It's fine for people who live in big cities, but what about people who dont have lots of medical choices???

dula · 11 months ago

Jesus! Didn't our effing Founding Fathers put anything in the effing Constitution that would limit rules or pardons dictated by effing asshole Presidents like George Bush? Seriously, aren't rules (are these the same as Executive Orders) actually laws that should be created and voted on by the Legislative Branch? I can't believe our Founder Fathers would have been that stupid. So, Bush can just issue a "rule" stating abortion is now illegal and it would be a new law that would be valid until the Courts could overturn it as Unconstitutional?
I don't get it...isn't Congress allowed any powers in this regard?

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

Our founding fathers probably didn't expect the country to be stupid enough to elect someone like Bush. Let alone twice.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Many of our founding fathers were very clear about their contempt for religion. But they didn't foresee the millions and millions who would get their information not from history but from Pat Robertson.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

That's the point I was making.

rodan32 · 11 months ago

Which ones? Cite sources, please.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

Here you go. I was able to find this in less than ten seconds. Knock yourself out. Or try googling "Jefferson on religion", or Franklin, etc.. You will quickly see with what lack of reverence many of the Founding Fathers held religion.


Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782


But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782


What is it men cannot be made to believe!

-Thomas Jefferson to Richard Henry Lee, April 22, 1786. (on the British regarding America, but quoted here for its universal appeal.)


Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787


Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting "Jesus Christ," so that it would read "A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom


I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Richard Price, Jan. 8, 1789 (Richard Price had written to TJ on Oct. 26. about the harm done by religion and wrote "Would not Society be better without Such religions? Is Atheism less pernicious than Demonism?")


I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789


They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.

-Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Sept. 23, 1800


Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802


History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.

-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.


The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814


Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814


In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814


If we did a good act merely from love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? ...Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than the love of God.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Law, June 13, 1814

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816

My opinion is that there would never have been an infidel, if there had never been a priest. The artificial structures they have built on the purest of all moral systems, for the purpose of deriving from it pence and power, revolts those who think for themselves, and who read in that system only what is really there.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Mrs. Samuel H. Smith, August, 6, 1816

You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Ezra Stiles Ely, June 25, 1819


As you say of yourself, I too am an Epicurian. I consider the genuine (not the imputed) doctrines of Epicurus as containing everything rational in moral philosophy which Greece and Rome have left us.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, Oct. 31, 1819


Priests...dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight and scowl on the fatal harbinger announcing the subversions of the duperies on which they live.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Correa de Serra, April 11, 1820

Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Short, April 13, 1820


To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul, angels, god, are immaterial, is to say they are nothings, or that there is no god, no angels, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise: but I believe I am supported in my creed of materialism by Locke, Tracy, and Stewart. At what age of the Christian church this heresy of immaterialism, this masked atheism, crept in, I do not know. But heresy it certainly is.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, Aug. 15, 1820


Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind.

-Thomas Jefferson to James Smith, 1822.

I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823


And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated reformer of human errors.

-Thomas Jefferson, Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823


It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825


May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government. All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of God.

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Roger C. Weightman, June 24, 1826 (in the last letter he penned)

Bibliography (click on an underlined book title if you'd like to obtain it):

Merrill D. Peterson, ed, Thomas Jefferson Writings, (The Library of America,1984)

O.I.A. Roche, ed, The Jefferson Bible: with the Annotated Commentaries on Religion of Thomas Jefferson, (Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., 1964)

Dickinson W. Adams, ed, et al, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Second Series (Princeton University Press, 1983)

Lester J. Cappon, ed, The Adams-Jefferson Letters, Vol. 2, (The University of North Carolina Press, 1959)

Alf J. Mapp, Jr., Thomas Jefferson, A Strange Case of Mistaken Identity, (Madison Books, 1987)

Julian P. Boyd, ed, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, (Princeton University Press 1950--)

A.A. Lipscomb, Albert E. Bergh, eds. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Assoc., 1903-1904)

------

For other quotes on the internet see:

The Letters of Thomas Jefferson: 1743-1826

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government

Jim · 11 months ago

Damn. Well done.

Malibu Barbie · 11 months ago

"As an example of the policies to which they object, Bush administration officials cited a Connecticut law that generally requires hospitals to provide rape victims with timely access to and information about emergency contraception."

Hey, Sarah Palin is running the federal government now. Who knew?

Mike_G · 11 months ago

Palin will make sure that victims of sexual assault are provided with a price list and subprime financing options for their rape kit, and billed for phoning the police to report it.

graymatter · 11 months ago

Imagine a Muslim EMT refusing to touch an intoxicated accident victim.

A Hindu nurse refusing treatment to an Untouchable.

A Baptist doctor allowing a Wiccan ER patient to expire because "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live".

This is so fuqt.

Bess · 11 months ago

This is just entirely too vague. Some of us in the Jewish faith were raised to find tatoos morally objectable. Does that count? What if I don't like mixed race couples or the children of mixed race? Does that count? In 2002, I needed emergency contraception. My doctor wrote me a perscription and I could not find a pharmacy within 30 miles that either carried it or would be willing to fill it. I finally found one and drove the 45 minutes only to be told that the pharmacist would not fill it. I would have to wait another 45 min for the next one to come on duty. And this is not some rural area, this is Phoenix. Granted, now that it is over the counter (to a point) it may be more easily available. However, with these type of new rules, who knows. Now I would just go to planned parenthood if I needed to avoid any greif.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

But it would be wrong to force someone to do something against their religion simply because it is their job. That would be like forcing a Christian waitress to serve shrimp. Or forcing a Christian to serve someone in the military who may have killed someone in an unjust war. Or forcing a Christian to serve a divorced person. Or someone who has had an affair. Or someone of another faith. Or someone intelligent.

ChrisSF · 11 months ago

I know you are being ironic, but in case people don't understand: NO ONE (except now maybe these workers) has a right under current law to refuse to do their job because it requires them to do something that goes against their religion. Observant Jews don't have a legal right to take Saturday off, Christian florists don't have a right to refuse to make flower arrangements for a gay wedding, and so on. You have two choices: work it out with your employer, or find a different job. That's just as it should be, and these health care workers should be no different.

RitornaVincitor · 11 months ago

yup.

Rob · 11 months ago

Far Right Republicans running the Catholic Church ? I am Catholic, and I do not hear anyone talking about hate. I think you need to actually attend a Catholic chuch once before you make such ridiculous comments. Any church has some bad apples, but because the Catholic church is one of the bigger ones, it gets more press. And the press is far too liberal, as sensationalism sells newspapers instead of talking about all points of view. I respect other religions and even though I do not necessarily agree with the gay lifestyle, I do not harrass them and do not treat them ay different in my work.

Steve_in_CNJ · 11 months ago

what exactly is this connection between liberalism and sensationalism? and where exactly is this "far too liberal" press? and what exactly do you mean by "the gay lifestyle" and how does one "disagree" with it?
finally this newsflash: if you oppose gay equality either actively or tacitly through your medieval church, you are harrassing gays in ways that you evidently cannot even imagine. you're just not man enough to take responsibility for it.

Gridlock · 11 months ago

Yeah, because FOX news has never been outrageously sensationalist.

god, the stupid.. it burns...

Webster · 11 months ago

Please. Stop. It's not a "lifestyle." What's a straight "lifestyle?" Gay people work, go to the store, pay their bills, feed their children, wash their clothes, do their homework, drive a colleague home, brush their teeth, mow the lawn, shovel the snow. Being gay is not a "lifestyle," it's just living, and aside from being born gay, GLBT people are human beings--just *gasp* like you.

Charlie · 11 months ago

We are not talking about you fack@%& we are talking about your kind. The far right Republicans that sits next to you when you go to church to hear the sermon by the child molester prist

Bob · 11 months ago

Not talking about hate? Look what your pope says about gays. Didn't the catholic church help the nazis in their campaign to exterminate Jewish people? Tell me again there is no hate in the catholic church.

OneManCommotion · 11 months ago

Again...if thay recieve even $1 from the government (Medicare and Medicade) that helps their bottom line it must be looked at as a "seperation of church and state"

These people won't stop.

rphillips4165 · 11 months ago

All of you haven't figured it out that this is a great thing. With the crappy economy even getting worse. Then all the wingnuts and religious zealots will either get fired or go out of business. There have been 2 million jobs lost this year alone. And next year looks worse. So let them stand by their principles. See how well that puts food on the table. Were moving back to the point were the customer is always right. So that gives us power. If they want our business then they will have to choose.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

That's the thing. This order makes it so that these people CAN'T be fired or held accountable for the people they hurt. There is nothing good about this.

rphillips4165 · 11 months ago

Did you not read what I wrote. The people getting hurt will be the wingnuts and zealots. None of you seem to realize how bad the economy is going to get. We are going into a DEPRESSION. I don't care what the pundits or economists say. And businesses will be closing down left and right. They will be willing to take anyones money. Gays, straight, religious or not. And a pharmacist who refuses a customer will be shown the door quickly. A doctor who refuses will be called on the carpet by the hospital. And let go if they don't give in.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

Except these employees will claim freedom of conscience and under this rule their bosses won't be allowed to fire them, at least not without a lawsuit and bad publicity.

rphillips4165 · 11 months ago

You can always come up with a reason to fire someone. It's not that hard. Just say you cutting back on employees.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

How many employers will have the guts to do that?

rphillips4165 · 11 months ago

If their all on the brink of bankruptcy then most of them.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

And how many people are going to get hurt before it gets to that point.

LeftCoastOracle · 11 months ago

It's apparent that none of you people have been through an economic downturn. Employers don't have to have guts to lay people off at such times. It's called a RIF (reduction in force) and it happens quite a lot during times like the one we're experiencing.

LeftCoastOracle · 11 months ago

During an economic downturn it's called a RIF (reduction in force) and nobody is immune to those.

LeftCoastOracle · 11 months ago

But they could be riffed.

Jim · 11 months ago

The power of the internet could help here. I could see websites popping up where healthcare deniers would be publicly outed , shamed, and ostracized.

jebauer · 11 months ago

Quite frankly, I'd like to know if my pharmacist is a bigot BEFORE I get my drugs from them... put it in big bright blinking neon above their oversized cave person heads. I'll take my business elsewhere.

RainbowPhoenix · 11 months ago

And what about the people who don't have anywhere else to take their business?

Jim · 11 months ago

Ya, exactly. Requiring providers to conspicuously post services they will deny might publicly shame them and at least place the onus of denial on them rather than the patient.

Milli · 11 months ago

Whats fair is fair. Gay doctors should be allowed to turn their backs on Christian patients if they feel morally bound to do so.

ChrisSF · 11 months ago

Umm, really? I don't think we want to let providers of critical health care services pick and choose who they will treat based on things like sexual orientation or religion. That's a dangerous road to go down, and we all would be worse off for it.

Milli · 11 months ago

That was my point.

LeftCoastOracle · 11 months ago

Do you really think a fundamentalist Christian would be upset if a gay doctor refused to treat them? I'd be surprised if they went to a gay doctor.

Buford · 11 months ago

The logical extreme would be a reversion back to the medical advice found in Leviticus... and this guy is well on his way -

http://www.evangelicalright.com/2007/02/christi...

rodan32 · 11 months ago

Yeah, this is the last straw! Especially after Bush engineered 9/11 and killed your hamster.

tellner · 11 months ago

Just for grins and giggles, let's suppose I'm a doctor and a member of Aryan Nations and the World Church of the Creator. My deeply-held religious beliefs state that mudskins, hebes, chinamen and beaners shouldn't get medical treatment like Human Beings. It's an abomination unto the Lord for them to foul White hospitals with their foul animal stench.

Does that mean I can deny them medical care or send them to a veterinarian if I'm feeling generous?

Congratulations Republicans! You've realized your Dream and gotten rid of huge chunks of Public Accommodations Laws and the Civil Rights Act and taken us back to 1949.

Jim · 11 months ago

Good point. Right on the mark.

Rahn · 11 months ago

Your hypothetical perfectly illustrates the absurdity and pernicious malevolence of these nasty neocons as they perform their lameduck vandalism in nearly every dept of the govt . 1949, indeed!

mattycakes · 11 months ago

Does the U.S. not have HUMAN RIGHTS FOR ALL? This is the 21st century, In Canada we have Human Rights, and myself being a ER nurse, I could never for any reason, deny care to a patient. This goes for Doctors, Pharmacists even store clerks. A Canadian can file a complaint with the Human Rights Commission and they do follow through with it. It is time all Americans demand the same.

Joe South of the Border · 11 months ago

That's because you live in Canada, which is a civilized and humane nation that provides health care to its citizens and offers full civil rights -- unlike us stupid, pathetic morons in the U.S.

LeftCoastOracle · 11 months ago

This would include the morning after pill but I hadn't thought of viagra. But then I'm a lesbian. I would be surprised if a Christian Scientist were a pharmacist given that they don't believe in medical intervention of any kind.

Jim · 11 months ago

If this rule is allowed to stand then some patient rights rules should also be implemented. Medical care givers should have to publicly post advance notice of medical care that they will refuse to provide. The onus of rejection should be shouldered by the medical "professional" who is witholding the care, not the patient who is being rejected. A person seeking medical assistance of any kind is not the one to bear the consequences of another's "religious convictions". Employers should be able to make unrestricted access to the medical services they provide a condition for employment for their employees. If your religious beliefs are going to influence the medical care you give then you should at least be upfront and honest about it and being willing to accept the consequences for it.

Bill Jones · 11 months ago

Wow, Way to go Dictator Bush! He is going out with a bang isnt he!

jess
www.anonymity.cz.tc

Joanna · 11 months ago

We have only one hospital in town, a catholic one. They have already stated they will refuse to help with abortions or end-of-life treatment.

Now I have to worry they'll refuse emergency treatment if they find out I'm gay??!? WTF? Is that legal?

nikolai · 11 months ago

Fine. Let them refuse. They will have people jumping over the counter to throttle them. My pharmacist started giving me lip about my insurance and I told him off. He calmed right down, gave me what I wanted and has been pretty humble ever since. I didn't threaten or bully him in any way, I merely stood up to him and his prima donna attitude. Let these religious nuts face the wrath of an already angry public. Go ahead you kooks, let's see just how much of your stupid, petty religious crap the public will take! HA!

JohnBisceglia · 11 months ago

Before you go into ANY business, ask the owner if he or she supports gay rights. Spend or leave.

chuck · 11 months ago

Alrighty now...I guess pharmacists and doctors should now need to post their religious beliefs and prejudices now to avoid any problems or direct confrontations. Gad...Bush will get his last jabs in...damn it!