Posted on 08/19/2008 9:57:22 AM PDT by mojito
Once again, judges in California have taken sides in the culture wars. On Monday, in North Coast Women’s Care v. Benitez, the Golden State’s highest court ruled that doctors may not rely on their religious principles to refuse in-vitro fertilization for same-sex couples.
The decision runs roughshod over the First Amendment’s free-exercise clause, seeking to supplant Judeo-Christian principles with the state-imposed religion of secularism. This is a false choice under the federal Constitution, which makes room for both.
Early press reporting indicated that the California court had found the state’s “compelling” interest in preventing discrimination outweighed the complaining doctors’ religious scruples. That is not exactly accurate.
The so-called “strict scrutiny” test is the most demanding one used by courts. It is commonly invoked by judges to rationalize the invalidation of state laws deemed violative of constitutional rights. To defend, the state must demonstrate that the challenged regulation furthers a “compelling” public interest and is — here’s the hard part — the “least restrictive alternative” for safeguarding that interest. In other words, if there is any reasonable way the state interest could be advanced without suppressing individual rights, the statute must be thrown out.
Ordinarily, strict scrutiny has no bearing on cases involving the First Amendment right to exercise one’s religion. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the test does not apply to a “neutral law of general application.” In non-lawyer-speak, these are laws that do not target religion and apply across the board to everyone.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
It may not happen tomorrow, but God is going to destroy the State of California.
how do you FORCE someone to do work in his field?
Threaten their License.
Liberal courts are always looking under some rock to “find” some new right they are compelled to re-define something that has stood for centuries.
And all good liberals agree that law evovles to suit THEM.
California is an amoral cesspool of crooked politicians and their judicial taskmasters. May it burn to the ground and every honest taxpaying citizen flee its borders. Every article about that God forsaken state sounds straight out of Atlas Shrugged.
Hedonism is now the established religion of California?
“Tyranny In the Name of Progress: California bans religious objections to same-sex pregnancies”
The headline is nonsense. It makes it sound like the court ruled that nobody can object to this. Not from the pulpit, not from anywhere. Totally misleading.
This will almost certainly be overturned anyway.
The California anti-discrimination statute, which was amended specifically to add sexual preference to a menu that did not originally reach that victim class, is plainly designed to ostracize good-faith religious objections to homosexuality.
Yes, I think you're right. The court has just established Hedonism as the official religion. And all non-adherents will be swiftly and surely punished.
This wouldn’t even be an issue if so-called “same-sex” pairings could, through their relationships ALONE, reproduce. Why not just do what they do to have sex and get pregnant that way? Oh, that’s right. They can’t. Two men can’t get pregnant by one another, neither can two women. They must ALWAYS employ the use of a third-party to perpetrate this fraud that they are just like heterosexual couples, that there is nothing immoral or perverted about them.
Why do they have to use the force of the government to make themselves have the APPEARANCE of normalcy? Why can they just go to some homo-friendly “doctor” who would gladly help them in their quest to have the appearance of normalcy?
Once again, this isn’t about tolerance; it is about trying to force their perversion down the throats of all who disagree with them. The doctors should just simply say, “We don’t care what the courts say; this is my conscience, I have the freedom of religion and speech and no one is going to make my violate my conscience.”
These doctors ought to consider moving to a state where their constitutional rights are respected.
Only the US Supreme Court can overturn a decision of a state supreme court.
Any appeal will be long and expensive, and the outcome uncertain.
In the meanwhile, the decision stands as law in the State of California, and by implication no professional service can be withheld from gay couples because of religious objections. Does this mean that Catholic Churches will be forced to perform gay marriage (also legal now) ceremonies if gay couples want them, or face discrimination lawsuits?
By the logic of this decision, I’d say the answer is “yes.”
Is Californication still a part of the United States?
Seems they violate most every article of the Constitution on a regular basis.
I suggest we let the Socilaist have it.
Allow anyone living there currently, one year to renouce citinzhip to California and accept citizenship to any State in the Union. After that they are stuck in The Socialist Commune of CaliMexiHomo........
In addition CaliMexiHomo would be required to pay 50 Billion dollars in a sucession fee to the United States.
The United States would not be obilgated in any manner to aid assist or defend CaliMexiHomo. Citizens of CaliMexiHomo would be required to have passports top enter the United States and would be required to have shots and be tagged with a GPS system while in the United States.
Just a starter idea but something whose time see to have arrived......
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
-First Amendment
Fortunately it says “Congress” and not “The Courts”.
Vote Obama and have a nice day. :)
The law allows gay couples who are turned down to file a civil suit for substantial money damages.
The state might well revoke their physicians license, but this is a designed to hit religious objectors in the pocketbook.
Trotsky:
The phrase he who will not work shall not eat, has been replaced with a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.
This is why the left wants to control all your “privileges” - so they control YOU.
That’s actually the definition of the “new tolerance”:
you will not be ALLOWED to disagree.
Oh, we’re not only required to “sanction” and “tolerate” their lifestyle,
you will be forced under penalty of law to “celebrate” their lifestyle.
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.