Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Jami and Krista Contreras ... brought their 6-day-old baby to Eastlake Pediatrics in Roseville for a checkup. But after waiting for their newborn’s first checkup, Dr. Vesna Roi refused to see them. Another doctor told the couple that Roi decided she couldn’t treat their baby because they are lesbians."
Dr. Roi later wrote them a letter (kind of) explaining and apologizing. I guess that makes it all better:
"After much prayer following your prenatal, I felt that I would not be able to develop the personal patient-doctor relationships that I normally do with my patients ... I should have spoken with you directly that day ... Please know that I believe that God gives us free choice and I would never judge anyone based on what they do with that free choice."
Should doctors be able to discriminate and not treat patients (or their children) on the basis of sexual orientation like the law allows them to do in many states such as Michigan? Or should gay people - like black people or Christian people - be protected under anti-discrimination laws?
No. I'm lenient on bakers being idiots, but doctors have a responsibility to serve the public. Private transaction or not, allowing this is not acceptable. Imagine if a gay man was shot and the only available surgeon was very much against homosexuals and was allowed to not serve them? Would that actually happen, I don't know. I'd like to think not, but cynicism is generally more realistic.
This doctor lacks respect. The BS apology letter is weak. All they got was a letter saying 'I should have spoken to you in person.' If she actually believed that, she would have had the common decency to at least call.
A doctor's responsibly must come before their personal convictions.
How can anyone sit here and agree with this? This doctor violated their oath and should be stripped of their license to practice. How any of you can deny this is a civil rights issue is beyond me. You are so blinded by irrational hatred that you don't even think.
Sickening.
What bothers you is that fact that others do think.
What's your position on abortion? A direct violation of this Oath you are throwing around.
There is a difference in agreeing with it and believing that someone should be able to do it.
I believe the doctor is wrong. I'm not going to go where others are going but isn't this the same argument many who are pro-choice use? "Personally I believe it's wrong and I would never do it but it's not my place to stop others"?
Quote:
This doctor violated their oath and should be stripped of their license to practice. How any of you can deny this is a civil rights issue is beyond me. You are so blinded by irrational hatred that you don't even think.
Sickening.
It's been explained why they did not violate their oath.
No. I'm lenient on bakers being idiots, but doctors have a responsibility to serve the public. Private transaction or not, allowing this is not acceptable. Imagine if a gay man was shot and the only available surgeon was very much against homosexuals and was allowed to not serve them?
How can anyone sit here and agree with this? This doctor violated their oath and should be stripped of their license to practice. How any of you can deny this is a civil rights issue is beyond me. You are so blinded by irrational hatred that you don't even think.
Sickening.
"Child of Lesbians" is not a protected class.
And while I don't agree with this at all, we still live in a free country, and a business owner is still entitled to serve or not serve whoever they choose.
This doctor lacks respect. The BS apology letter is weak. All they got was a letter saying 'I should have spoken to you in person.' If she actually believed that, she would have had the common decency to at least call.
Have you read up on the story? - it's even worse than that. Not only did the doctor not speak to the family in advance of the appointment or the day of the appointment, the doctor took the day off work to avoid seeing them at the office that day. She instead had a co-worker doctor tell these ladies she couldn't treat their child because they're gay.
, but I am a libertarian, and I believe in voluntary association...INCLUDING BUSINESS.
That's fine. I would go along with that.
But ONLY if said business posts a notice in a prominent place listing the people they will NOT serve.
Otherwise, how could anyone make an informed decision about whether or not to patronize that business?
NOTICE
THIS BUSINESS WILL NOT SERVE ............., ................, ........ (fill in the blank(s))
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
