Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The lawsuit claims that canceling the surgery involved discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause and the Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare). Since UMMS operates St. Joseph as a Catholic hospital, the lawsuit also claims that the alleged discrimination violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.


1 posted on 07/24/2020 6:26:00 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind
You MUST under penalty of law
2 posted on 07/24/2020 6:29:35 AM PDT by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizens Are Born Here of Citizen Parents|Know Islam, No Peace-No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

So the plaintiff could chose another hospital? Had to pick a hospital that is Christian?

Wonder how much money was lost defending this, and how it could have been spent to help people in need.


3 posted on 07/24/2020 6:32:24 AM PDT by Made In The USA (Next thing you know, 'ol Jed's a millionaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
The hospital can argue that removing the uterus is a cosmetic procedure that they won't perform and force the plaintiff's lawyers to come up with asinine argument that it's required.

It would be great to see what argument they could possibly make to show such surgery is necessary for the health of the patient, because if it's for the patient's "mental health", one could argue for psychotherapy and medication instead of surgery. Pit the therapists and pharmaceutical industry against the sick proponents of this.

As for the Supreme Court decision, if men and women are equal, how is having a uterus discriminatory?

4 posted on 07/24/2020 6:39:24 AM PDT by T.B. Yoits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Gorsuch et al. capitulate to the decadence of Western Civilisation.


5 posted on 07/24/2020 6:47:08 AM PDT by Savage Beast (President Trump, loving God, America, and the American People, is on the Side of love the Angels!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Who would have thought Gorsuch would turn? He has bought into the premise that ‘any person can decide their own biology’, when I’m sure he knows that every cell in that person’s body determines their gender, AND CANNOT BE CHANGED WITH ANY SURGERY. He is promoting the Leftist meme that we all must obey And accept any other person’s mental health crisis. We used to try to help people who were in a mental health crisis. Now we are required to not just accept their disorder, but celebrate it.

Trump needs to vet his SCOTUS candidates much better.


6 posted on 07/24/2020 6:54:12 AM PDT by originalbuckeye ('In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'- George Orwell..?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
The main point of the article is a good one, but there’s an angle to this that adds an element of confusion. How does the University of Maryland Medical System operate a Catholic hospital.

I suspect the hospitals’ legal arguments in many of these cases will be undermined by arrangements like this where the hospital has many operating/business conditions that make it something other than a legitimate religious organization.

7 posted on 07/24/2020 6:54:47 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("We're human beings ... we're not f#%&ing animals." -- Dennis Rodman, 6/1/2020)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Blame the Federalist Society and their worthless vetting process. No more BS about “textualists” and “originalists”. We need proud, unabashed right-wing activists on the federal courts at all levels. The Democrats have been putting forth left-wing activists for decades now while Republicans play a losing game with these “will he - won’t he” milquetoasts.


8 posted on 07/24/2020 7:51:19 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Let’s suppose I need a repair on my car, but the mechanic I chose doesn’t want to perform the repair. Now, let’s say I take him to court and force him to perform the repair. How satisfied am I likely to be with this forced repair?

Especially if it’s a complicated repair, wouldn’t I want to go to someone who specializes in that repair?

What I think we need is legislation that prevents advocates from using the legal system to force their agenda on people who do not want to share it. The typical business simply can not afford to defend itself from lawfare.


9 posted on 07/24/2020 7:59:51 AM PDT by Gen.Blather (Wait! I said that out loud?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Just loving MR. OPERATION WARP SPEED & his SCOTUS choices. I am sure Barrett will come thru on the mandated C-19 jabs as the Elites know what’s best for us Lessers.

PITY the poor children/teens with no Adults to protect them by Law- Pedophiles are having a field day and the screwed up gender dysphorics will get no help - the Munchausen-by-proxy adults aid & abet the SJW transformational fascists out to ruin normal human life so predictably. There are no political solutions left for us. We will all answer to God for tolerating the intolerable.


15 posted on 12/07/2020 4:58:56 PM PST by Sioux-san
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson