Posted on 09/28/2015 11:06:56 AM PDT by xzins
A Harvard-affiliated hospital reportedly expelled a popular doctor after he voiced his religious beliefs about homosexuality.
Dr. Paul Church, who had admitting privileges at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) in Boston, was told his position on homosexuality constituted as "discrimination," "harassment," and "unprofessional conduct," and that Bible verses regarding homosexuality are similarly "offensive" and discriminatory.
"Dr. Church was censured and subjected to disciplinary action for stating an objection on medical and religious grounds to the promotion of homosexuality," says Richard Mast, a Liberty Counsel attorney representing Church.
Mast confirmed Church received a letter from the hospital, assessed the letter and exercised his rights under the bylaws for admission purposes. Though the hospital had handed down the expulsion in March, Church was denied an appeal in early September.
LifeSiteNews reports the hospital began censuring Church's comments more than a decade ago.
Church's comments were allegedly posted on a BIDMC communication server years ago.
"The evidence is irrefutable that behaviors common within the homosexual community are unhealthy and high risk for a host of serious medical consequences, including STD's, HIV and AIDS, anal cancer, hepatitis, parasitic intestinal infections, and psychiatric disorders," Church reportedly wrote.
"Life expectancy is significantly decreased as a result of HIV/AIDS, complications from the other health problems, and suicide. This alone should make it reprehensible to the medical community, who has an obligation to promote and model healthy behaviors and lifestyles."
For attorney Mast, Church's case represents the fight for religious freedom many Christians face when making their faith public in the private sector.
Just because an act is legal—be it abortion, education standards or gay marriage—doesn't make it moral, Mast says.
"This needs to be a wake-up call for America," Mast says. "What we see being enacted in corporate America is vague terms like labeling something 'offensive' is grounds for being fired. We're seeing deligitimized expressions of religious beliefs. ... Rather than disagreeing with ideas, (corporate America) is characterizing the expression of a Christian worldview as offensive, hateful and hurtful, effectively enacting gag orders across corporate America for religious beliefs."
Folks, look what’s going on in San Francisco at the search words “Folsom Street Fair”
This doc has a very nice cause of action.
Since he is being fired for his religious beliefs about homosex he has a good case for religious persecution.
Zombie’s photojournalism of the Folsom Street Fair is factual and frightening. Recommended.
bkmk
I do not see how his words about the physical effects of homosexuality have anything to do with religion.
When I read Dr. Church’s comments listed here, he is simply stating the medical consequences of homosexual behavior and their effect on medical health. What he is quoted as saying has no reference to religion in the above text.
On the basis of the above quotes, he should be listened to, not dismissed. What he is saying is correct. The general health of people involved in homosexual behavior is bound to be affected sooner or later. The hospital is wrong!
“Folks, look what’s going on in San Francisco at the search words “Folsom Street Fair””
I highly recommend you DONT search for that unless you have a desire to gouge your eyes out.
I didn’t see any religion in his comments either.
Religion is now anything you say that disagrees with them.
And it was a proposition voted in by a majority of voters.
” told his position on homosexuality constituted as “discrimination,” ....”
Of course it was “discrimination” — but, not the way the hospital officials meant it. Without exception, every living thing “discriminates” — continuously. The ability to discriminate between helpful and harmful things is essential to survival.
When the term “discrimination” is flung about; various adjectives are implied: “unjust”, “unfair”, “unreasonable”, “unlawful”, etc. In this case, it may be that the “discrimination” was “unlawful” — i.e. it has somehow become against the law to notice certain things. However, that does not mean that it was “unfair”, or “unreasonable” discrimination — especially in the context of preventative medicine.
The truth is hate to those who hate the truth.
God Bless Dr. Church!
Please read my tagline.
I certainly didn’t see where he brought RELIGION into the discussion. It all seemed to be MEDICAL TRUTHS and maybe even holding up the Hippocratic Oath. Seems kinda odd that a hospital would want to distance themselves from a fact-telling doctor. And why did it take a decade?
Private hospitals which accept federal funds should not have the option of denying the right of free speech.
It was legal to kill Jews in Nazi Germany. It was also legal to throw political dissenters into insane asylums in the Soviet Union and destroy their brains, too.
Am I beginning to see a pattern here?
I don’t think anyone can be denied the right of free speech. Sometimes, though, they pay the consequences. However, I get your point. Free speech shouldn’t be limited when the entity is taking government money. I might modify that a bit to say “free speech that is identified as speaking personally and not for the institution” should be protected. A religious hospital is a private hospital. If a doctor starts advocating for abortion that would be a scandal at such a hospital. The hospital should have recourse if the doctor gives no indication that he is speaking only for himself and not for the hospital.
If related to a teacher in a Christian school, then I would consider anything within the classroom to be the equivalent to saying the religious school supports those views. If the guy says after work on facebook that he thinks they should allow homosexual marriage, then that’s his business. I think he should do the morally courageous thing and leave that school, but words outside of work should be treated differently than behavior outside of work. A morals clause in the contract should be enforceable.
Could this be the case that begins to bring our nation back to reality?
His medical comments are being called ‘religion’. That could wake people up. It makes me aware, however, how dishonest are the adversaries.
Very revealing about what these people hold as sacred, religious, truth. This IS their faith: heathen, homoerotic paganism. Check out Fulsom Street. You will not believe your eyes.
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.