RELIGIOUS FREEDOM! Doctor refuses to care for lesbian couple's 6-day-old baby

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Seriously? I mean, the natural extension of this is to ask what if there was no doctor available. So she would only have begrudgingly treated a child? At best?

If you're a doctor you have a responsibility that overrides (breathe Libertarians) your "rights". You don't want to risk interacting with people about whom you have a religious objections? F*** off somewhere else then.

She's a truly horrible person and no it's not because she thinks differently to me, or whatever weak an defenceless straw men you wish throw, it's because it was a basic dereliction of her responsibilities as an emergency physician - and whatever she believes about the parents, she had no right (not a specific constitutional right, so I guess I lose huh?  But a moral right) to refuse and pass on treatment on their baby.

For those who are defending her actions "hey, but she found a doctor to treat the baby" (or you know, she could have cut the crap and just done it herself) - I assume you'll be cool when you take your newborn to the hospital (btw, when infants are at their MOST vulnerable) and the Doctor goes "cha, you no wha? Uh uh... I don't like who you are" - I'll find someone else to care for your child .... 'cause her right to judge is more important that your child's immediate well-being?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

In this case, it kind of seems like a win-win: the doctor didn't have to violate their conscience, the baby got cared for, and the parents got to interact with a doctor who would be much friendlier and helpful than before. People saying "what if there were no doctor available" are missing the point. There was one, and we have no idea what would have happened in that hypothetical.

I push back on the idea that performing your job as you would for anyone else—in this case, caring for a baby—"violates their conscience." That phrase should have some actual meaning. People who abuse it because they want to show their disapproval or disgust for people different from them by refusing to provide services or goods they would otherwise sell happily, are doing people who live their faith and experience real discrimination or conflicts a disfavor.

What annoys me about these appeals to 'conscience' is that usually they only ever seems to apply to religious conscience and secondly, it makes an assumption that a persons 'conscience' actually deserves any special protection. I do genuinely believe that some people deep down personally feel that their 'conscience' prohibits racial mixing or equality, but we don't allow people to defer to that without repercussion because it's cleary f-u-cking stupid

Thank you! and the issue about whether or not there was another doctor is not tangential or unimportant. It's kind of fundamental.