Faith based bill would OK doctors denying care to gays and single mothers

You said in your post you are to the right in your positions did you not?

It's your labeling of anyone who doesn't agree with you about homosexuals as a hater that is at issue in your post.


By your own logic in this response you should have no problem with any sexual preference. Is that true?

 

It was labeling anyone who didn't agree with their view on homosexuals as a hater that I have issue with.

 

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. It acknowledges that not all speech is communication.

 

Is behavior communication though? Are left-handed people expressing themselves simply by doing everything left-handed, or is it the act of expression itself that makes them left-handed? You're going to have to explain yourself here.

 

meh,

the hippocratic oath is no big deal I guess.

 

I have no problem with any preference , Please show me where I said anyone was a hate??

 

I try to be consistent . I don't have a poster but I did see him concert late last summer !!

 

I don't think these moral Christians are denying care to gays and single women who fornicate, they are denying care only to the ones who don't work and can't afford to take care of themselves.

They CHOOSE to help the righteous who abide by Christian doctrines, so it isn't fair to paint them as hateful.

 

"Faith based bill"

Stop right there.

 

I agree with the bill not because I don't like gays or single mothers for the fact any legislation that gets government out of some ones privately owned business Im all for.
We have gotten to a point there is so to much rules and regulation controlling some ones privately owned business the government might as well step in and run the dam thing

 

Homosexuality is not behavior. One does not have to do a single action in order to be homosexual. Homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is defined by attraction.

 

So you don't care if a child marries an adult then. If that's true you are the first consistent libertarian who has made the "i dont care" argument.

Easily.

That is what I have an issue with. Labeling anyone who doesn't support gay marriage as a hater of homosexuals. It is verbatim from the far left argument book on the subject.

 

http://www.sharecare.com/health/sex-and-relationships/my-doctor-need-to-know-my-sexual-orientation

 

Bush is gay!
https://www.google.com/search?q=bus...ulah-of-saudi-arabia-holding-hands%2F;468;331

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/2/4/6/1/3/8/9/bush-43807067594.jpeg

If he ends up in Idaho the doctor won't treat him.

 

Then why the bill and why is it stated that if you use your faith to deny service, then it should be ok?

 

Homosexuality is behavior.

Behavior Definition

dictionary.search.yahoo.com
n. noun

• The manner in which one behaves.
• The actions or reactions of a person or animal in response to external or internal stimuli.
• One ofthese actions or reactions.

 

Homosexuality requires neither an action nor reaction. It can be entirely abstract.

 

How deep did you need to dig to find that? LOL! You obviously missed the point. My original point was why would a doctor even need to know a patient's "sexual orientation"? Children get treated do they have to say what "sexual orientation" they are? No.

This is just liberal hysteria and fear mongering. Trying to say there is discrimination against gays at every turn is an over blown pile of propaganda. If a doctor did refuse to treat someone because they were gay they would be going against their ethics:

www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/health-care-antidiscrimination-laws-protecting-32296.html

To most doctors their patient's health and well being come before anything else. Saying that gays will be refused health care is an insult to healthcare providers everywhere.

Furthermore it isn't even common practice for doctors to know a patient's "sexual orientation":

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19042284

This is just another phony aspect of the liberal idea of discrimination against gays. Remember it is an election year and the democrats are desperate. This propaganda is an attempt to rally their ever narrowing base.

- - - Updated - - -

Another unsubstantiated claim....well done (golf clap)

 

You said that homosexuality is defined by attraction. Of course you mean sexual attraction.


definition of SEXUAL ATTRACTION ...


psychologydictionary.org/sexual-attraction

Definition of SEXUAL ATTRACTION: a first step in mating behaviour of many animals where stimuli are emitted to attract the opposite sex.

 

Where your scientific proof that homosexuality is defined only by sex again? You have yet to substantiate a single claim in this thread or any other I have ever debated you in.

Really, you are more like a "trolling champion" than anything dealing with debates.

 

Fine. You want it to be a behavior, it can be a behavior. Are you okay with business being able to discriminate against people for any behavior?

 

I am not making a claim I am only challenging yours. BTW, you have yet to substantiate your lame claim.

- - - Updated - - -

So you admit you are wrong.....congrats.

 

It depends on the behavior. Jesus Christ didn't like merchants doing business in His temple, lest the temple be turned into a "den of robbers". So He kicked them out. Was Jesus wrong for discriminating against that kind of rude behavior?

 

You claimed that homosexuality is defined by sex upthread. Support that claim.

If only you would do the same...where's that "proof" of the existence of God that numerous people have asked you to substantiate down in the Religion sub-forum at again?

- - - Updated - - -

With physical violence? Absolutely. It just helps confirm how much of a petty thug your god is.

 

I agree. Jesus would help a sick gay person. Then he would tell them to knock off the gay stuff.