In Michigan there is the current law proposal of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It is closely similar to the one that almost passed in Arizona. The bill has passed at the Republican lead house, and is awaiting further approval. It essentially states that people do not have to perform an act that would violate their sincerely held religious beliefs. "For example, a Christian doctor who does not believe in a gay lifestyle would not have to treat a gay patient," CBS Detroit legal analyst Charlie Langton said. "Or perhaps, a Jewish butcher would not have to handle non-Kosher meat." Another thing that was brought up is that a paramedic would not be required to treat and LGBT patient with pre-hospital care. Opinions?
Perfect. This is great. Now I can refuse to serve or care for Christians/Muslims/whoever else in any way. That would violate my sincerely held religious beliefs. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with America? The old bigots need to collapse already.
If a Doctor or EMT does this, I won't feel sorry for them at all when they get slapped with a wrongful death or malpractice suit and end up paying the victim's family until they croak.
So...given that the sort of people pushing this thing are also the sort who are inclined to foam at the mouth about Muslims imposing Sharia law on us all (and given that my understanding is that there is a significant Muslim population in Michigan)...what are they going to do if a Muslim refuses to serve a Christian due to their own 'sincerely held religious beliefs'? For that matter, given that different Christian denominations spent centuries happily slaughtering each other over minor points of doctrine, and at their core really have to believe that all other denominations but theirs are wrong...can't a Catholic refuse to provide services to a Protestant (or vice versa) under this law? Or someone from one Protestant denomination refuse to provide services to someone from another? As an atheist can I refuse service to someone for being religious? On a related note (although not dealing with this law directly), in the absence of ENDA or the like, can I fire someone for being straight? Sounds like a recipe for chaos to me. And that's before we get to the potential impact on Michigan businesses if news of this goes viral and a backlash gets going. Serve the idiots promoting this right if it ends up blowing up massively in their faces. Todd
I just don't get how this kind of thing gets passed by anyone , it's absolutely ridiculous. If this things passes it'll be like we're regressing instead of moving forward with acceptance and equality and that's just horrible.
I take solace that as soon as I walk across the stage with my degree in hand, I'm fleeing this right-wing hellhole for greener liberal pastures. I'm a proud Michigander, I've lived here my whole life, and I've never wanted to get out of this state so badly. The next thing they're going to do is pass a district plan, as Michigan hasn't been won by a Republican Presidential candidate since 1988, the Republicans are going to split up our electoral votes so that whoever wins the gerrymandered Congressional district wins that electoral vote. Romney would have won 9 votes in Michigan under this plan in 2012 despite losing the state by 10 points. Not only are they walking all over folks like me, but they're also going to cheat to win elections.
A Jewish butcher shouldn't have to handle non-kosher meats, nor should a Muslim with non-halal meats. That doesn't affect anyone. But I really doubt this was to help Jews or Muslims.
We need stronger and non-corrupt leadership. Right now, they want to create their own rules instead of playing by the current rules.
You won't find a non corrupt person on the earth, and "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".
Oh I feel so wonderfully knowing this is the state I grow up in with family members in the house voting for it:tantrum::***:
If that were passed up here, that would go to the SCC faster than you can say "Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms". Fucking Michigan, this makes me sick.
Maybe I should become a Jehovah's witness (and a doctor) just to deny one of these 'Christians' a life saving blood transfusion because of my beliefs. Not having to prepare certain meat or a wedding cake is one thing, but EMT's and ER doctors shouldn't be able to let someone die just because of the doctor's beliefs. I could see other doctors and surgeons being allowed to not do treatments that go against their beliefs, since the person could just find another one, but that should be thrown out when a life is in danger. Actually, denying anything could possibly end up on a slippery slope. If this passes, they'll probably move on to proposing something that makes it so insurance companies don't have to cover HIV medications.
Actually, denying anything could possibly end up on a slippery slope. If this passes, they'll probably move on to proposing something that makes it so insurance companies don't have to cover HIV medications.[/QUOTE] Actually, part of the RFRA involves that. It says that businesses that provide employees with health insurance can opt out of that coverage when it comes to birth control and STD medications. It's awful.
That is untrue. It is denying service/employment based on religious reasoning, which is awful, but there is nothing in this law regarding meds or EMT care. I have friends who are nurses and EMT's.
