Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Lesbian artificial insemination

Should Christian, Jewish or Muslim doctors be forced to artificially inseminate lesbians? Two Christian doctors decided that to do so would violate their religious convictions (CNSNews).

Although she undoubtedly had dozens, if not hundreds of other doctors to choose from, one lesbian decided to sue her Christian doctors for refusing to artificially inseminate her. This lesbian would undoubtedly demand "tolerance" for her own lifestyle choices, but she refuses to exhibit tolerance toward the doctors who disagree with her.

To force doctors to perform procedures that violate their religious convictions is not only a violation of the first amendment, it is tyranny! When Barack Obama becomes president, you can expect much more of the same.


Brent said...

Could you please point me in the direction of an Obama quote where he has said that he would force Christian doctors to inseminate lesbians against their will?

L'oiseau said...

I don't know, this is a tough one. I mean, if Dr.'s can start discriminating against people because of sexual orientation, then why should they not start discriminating against people of different colors, races, or religions than themselves? I certainly don't want my ER Dr. going over my personal religious records or something before he will treat me.

Plus, the article says that they treated her with fertility drugs for over a year, and then all of a sudden, wouldn't complete the process? That's just weird.

The point is that the procedure they're being asked to do isn't against their values, it's the person's lifestyle that is getting the procedure which is against their values. Would they refuse heart surgery or tumor removal for gays next? This is a slippery slope, I hope she wins her case.

Dennis said...

Brent, Obama never said he would force doctors to inseminate lesbians.

But Obama is a big supporter of gay special rights and there is no way his administration would come down on the side of these Christian doctors and support their religious liberty.

l'oiseau, I think this lesbian is discriminating against these doctors. I mean, she could get inseminated by dozens of doctors but she is choosing to legally force these Christian doctors to violate their religous convictions. Where is her tolerance of their beliefs?

Comparing artifical insemination with heart surgery or tumor removal is absurd. If the doctors were refusing to do heart surgery on her because she was lesbian, I would be criticising the doctors for violating the very Christian standards they claim to uphold.

We have a constitutional right to freedom of religion. We do not have a constitutional right to be artifically inseminated, much less by someone whose religious convictions would be violated!

Increasingly our country is beginning to interpret freedom of religion very narrowly as freedom to worship whatever we want within the confines of our particular house of worship.

But our whole country was founded by people who were fleeing from the tyrrany of being forced to violate their religious convictions!

Private pharmacists are being forced to provide contraceptives against their convictions. A Catholic adoption agency was forced to shut its doors rather than violate its religious convicions. Christian doctors are being forced to do artifical insemination against their convictions. Some gays tried to force a California Christian school to violate its code of conduct. Some have tried to get Christian doctors to do abortions against their religous convictions.

Americans seem so willing to flush our freedom of religion down the toilet!

There are plenty of other people who are very willing, even eager to offer adoptions or inseminations for gay people. There are other agencies that will do abortions. Why do so many gays think it necessary to force Christians to do these things for them when they can find others to do it? The demand tolerance FROM others but have no tolerance FOR others

jazzycat said...

Amen. I was going to comment, but your comment is complete. It may soon come down to what Peter said in Acts 5:29 But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

L'oiseau said...

My question is, and maybe I didn't make it clear, what exactly is the lesbian asking the Dr.'s to do that is against Christianity, the Scriptures or God? Because I am having a hard time figuring it out.

If I believed that this was really against their beliefs, then I would agree with you, (I agree with you if it was an abortion, for instance).

I feel that the Dr.'s are the ones being discriminatory. They were asked to do a procedure that is not against their religious beliefs. Period. You can't pick and choose with medical procedures, or how will you get it to stop there?

Would you want a homosexual Dr. to give a Christian couple fertility drugs for a year, only to deny them the rest of the procedure (the part that counts) because there are conflicting personal beliefs between Dr. and patient??? That's ridiculous!!

jazzycat said...

I really don't see how a Christian could read the last part of Romans 1, accept it as God's word and then think artificial insemination of lesbians would be O.K. since it is not specifically mentioned.

Dennis said...

l'oiseau, do you want the government to interpret the Bible for you and decide which of your objections are based on valid biblical principles and which are not?

Whether these doctors' objections are based on valid biblical principles or not (and I agree with Jazzycat) when government tries to force you to violate your religious convictions, we no longer have freedom. We have tyranny.

L'oiseau said...

I just think it's hypocritical as a Doctor to do a procedure on certain people and not others. It's not the procedure that is immoral, like it would be for abortion.

Romans 1?

So, are you saying the Dr's should not give this procedure to any person who is a "covenant-breaker"? Because that's what this passage is talking about.

Those who would not glorify God were given over to a myriad of things, one of them being homosexuality. I'm not sure what your point was.