Martha Coakley is a liar and a thug at heart.
Posted on 01/14/2010 9:42:34 PM PST by LikeLight
The following YouTube clip is shocking audio of Massachusetts Attorney General and U.S. Senate candidate, Martha Coakley, arrogantly informing Catholics (and, by extension, other Christian believers who might wish to exercise their religious rights of conscience), “You can have religious freedom, you probably shouldn’t work in the emergency room.”
[video goes here - view at source link]
Attorney General Coakley, with all due respect to her office, is wrong. Her statement mischaracterizes the law and, if applied, would amount to unlawful religious discrimination. Religious freedom means much more than believers merely being free to voluntarily segregate themselves from certain professions (especially the caring professions which are so often reflective of the very essence of religious faith).
Under Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act, employers are prohibited from discriminating against individuals because of their religion in hiring, firing and other terms and conditions of employment. This means employers cannot treat you any less favorably because of your religious beliefs or practices, nor can they force you to stop participating in religious activities as a condition of your employment. And this means emergency rooms cannot discriminate against practicing Catholics or others who hold religious values.
Apologies, but I won't be up to properly host this thread tonight - look forward to seeing your comments in the morning.
LikeLight (Stephen Bloom)
I’ll defend Coakley a little bit here.
I don’t think she’s saying that they can’t work there. I don’t think that she’s saying hospitals can refuse to hire you.
But Catholic nurses probably won’t like to hear what Coakley has to say on that issue. Coakley probably thinks it would be good if hospitals could pick and choose on that basis.
OMFG, if Coakley gets elected, we’ll become like Red China, and people will be forced to participate in proceedures such as abortion, with no freedom of religious conscience...
Massachusetts voters WILL be able to pick and choose on the basis of Coakley's remarks (all of them coming to light just in time for voters to consider)!
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1225720&format=text
breaking news - Brown up by 4
Got Marxism?
On another thought, why would a woman be so stupid to walk into a Catholic hospital and think they are going to perform an abortion? It would be like walking into a car dealership and asking for a horse.
Thanks for your thoughts, and you might be right. Intent is hard to discern. To me, the tone of her voice suggests even more than the words alone. Either way, her comments amount to an epic political disaster in a heavily Catholic state.
Relying on New England patriots (not the football team) to save us from this horrible fate.
Should be a wicked no brainer.
He's got the mo and the lead.
None for me, thanks!
“I didn’t see what happened” is the new “the system worked”
Because popular culture has so effectively marginalized Christianity that many average people have no concept that Catholic hospitals are a living expression of Christian values. They have no idea.
It’ll be hard to say exactly what one bad thing was.
I’m thinking that the Dems knew they were likely to lose at least a week ago, when Coakley had lost only 20 points of her 30 point lead, and it became Project “make it look like it’s not Obama’s fault”. Make it look like Coakley lost because she ran a terrible campaign or because she’s a terrible candidate, not because people, even in Mass, do not want Obamacare or anything else Obama is trying to sell.
Who assaulted the reporter? Someone on Coakley’s staff? Or was it an Obama appointee who was working for the DSCC at the time? You didn’t see the headline “DSCC staffer attacks reporter” “Obama appointee attacks reporter”, you see “Coakley thug”. The attack took place in Washington, DC.
The idea is to make it look like Coakley is incompetent.
Meehan might very well have developed Project Blame Coakley himself, or as part of a team. “Ok boss, I’ll do something to make Coakley look bad.”
Fact is, Obamacare is unpopular. Coakley didn’t make Obamacare unpopular. But Coakley was going to lose because Obamacare is unpopular. Everything else is a sideshow. You vote for Coakley if you want Obamacare you vote for Brown if you don’t. People know this. Brown will win (if he wins and he probably will) because people don’t want Obamacare.
You might want to consider pinging this one... Thanks
None for me, thanks!
It's kind of like asking "Got spoiled milk?" isn't it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.