« The Patron Saint of Amateur Radio | Main | The Historicity of Ancient Texts »
California Supreme Court Obliterates Freedom of Religion
by American Phoenix | August 18, 2008
The latest atrocity from the California Supreme Court, which seem to be occurring every few months now, is that medical doctors may not refuse to provide artificial reproductive technology (”ART”) to homosexuals. The two medical doctors in question claimed that they would not provide this service because a) the woman was unmarried and b) because her homosexuality would, inter alia, deprive the resulting child of a father. The physicians argued that to be compelled to perform ART in such cases was a violation of their right to free exercise of their religious beliefs under both the California and federal constitution.
The Supreme Court ruled against the doctors on both counts. The case came up on appeal from the trial court which ruled against the doctors on a motion for summary adjudication - in other words, they ruled against the doctors without ever allowing them to present evidence.
The problems with this ruling are so numerous, I don’t even know where to start. In it’s ruling, the Court wrote:
But in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary adjudication of affirmative defense No. 32, the trial court did not at all preclude defendant physicians from later offering evidence at trial of their religious grounds for refusing to perform the IUI medical procedure for plaintiff because of her marital status as an unmarried woman rather than her sexual orientation as a lesbian. In granting Benitez’s motion, the trial court stated that it had merely determined that affirmative defense No. 32 lacked any basis in law as a defense to plaintiff’s Unruh Civil Rights Act claim of sexual orientation discrimination, but that it was not precluding defendant physicians from “tell[ing] the jury what happened in this case,” that is, presenting evidence that their religious beliefs prohibited them from medically inseminating an unmarried woman.
North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group, Inc. v. San Diego County Superior Court, Opinion No. S142892, August 18, 2008
Take this case in combination with the recent Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage, and it becomes clear that an objection on the basis of marital status won’t be upheld either. If a homosexual couple can legally marry, then no objection on the basis of marital status is possible. The Supreme Court opinion thus pays lip service to the doctors, giving them a non-option. Unless, of course, California passes Proposition 8 this November.
The Court concludes that no objection on the grounds of freedom of religion is possible in the face of a neutral law of general applicability. A doctor providing services in the area of reproduction, must provide the service to everyone who asks for it or go out of business. Interestingly, no distinction was made between necessary medical procedures and elective medical procedures such as this one.
If that is the case, then there can be no freedom of religion. Obeisance to state law is commanded - and the penalty is loss of your business, loss of your ability to earn a living, and much, much more. Churches have already lost their tax exempt status. Christians, Muslims and anyone else who have a religious objection to homosexual conduct can be prevented from becoming foster parents - in the State of California. The number of ways this decision can be used to penalize and persecute religious believers is incalculable. This is not freedom.
Ironically, this brings us to the result that, it is permissible to sacrifice sheep and goats if your religion commands it. But if your religious belief is that children should have a mother and a father and that neither parent is disposable, you are not permitted to act in accordance with those beliefs.
What is so odd about all of this is that it doesn’t take a religious belief to come to the conclusion that children being raised without a mother or a father is not in a child’s best interests. Mothers and fathers each bring something completely different and vital to their child’s well being. Study after study has confirmed this. Courts and homosexual activists keep ignoring it.
What the Court has really done is to pitt the freedom of religion against homosexual rights. Their conclusion is that one’s right to be a homosexual and inflict fatherlessness on children is more important than another person’s right to act in accord with their religion in order to ensure that all children have both a mother and a father.
This isn’t tolerance. It is religious persecution.
Apparently, the only people who have the right to “define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life” are homosexual activists.
Topics: California, Catholic, Christianity, Culture of Death, Family, Homosexuality, Law, Medicine, Politics, Religion |
August 19th, 2008 at 11:41 am
I have linked to your post from Special rights trumps doctors religious rights
November 1st, 2008 at 9:07 pm
[...] The right to freedom of religious expression of the doctors was trumped by homosexual rights, which I wrote about in a previous post. These doctors could be facing over $1 million in attorneys’ [...]