My first reaction when I read the title of the news artcile was right the fuck on, but then I actually read it and go to thinking. Like the media does to most news stories, this one too has been twisted slightly away from what the issue is. This isn’t about a doctor witholding what we would immediately define as “care” to gays, and the issue wasn’t life threatening. What we are talking about here is artifical insemenation. You can read ABC news take on the case here: Docs Can’t Withold Care to Gays

One of the first things I did was check out the Hippocratic oath, and wow the things you learn. That could be a whole nother topic of debate considering the classical version, versus the modern version, versus the one that’s ok with abortion and doctor assisted suicide versus the one that isn’t. So I don’t believe it can be used in any argument anymore so let’s just talk about freedom, because that’s the underlying issue here isn’t it? And because it is about freedom and the best interests of a free society, I believe the California Supreme Court was a 100% wrong in their ruling.

A doctor in a private practice should be allowed to chose to treat, period. It isn’t a government owned practice were talking about and it isn’t a life threatening, family member died because they didn’t treat me issue. On the Above Top Secret forum, there was a poster who weighed in on this issue and stated - “I don’t like the idea of the government forcing its idea of morality onto private citizens.” And that’s the scary part about this case because that’s exactly what happened here, disguised as being protecting to a group that is very much discriminated against. And it is because of that very statement, the fact that government does force its idea of morality onto it’s private citizens that gays and lesbians can’t get legally married in half the country. So the same mindset that was used to keep them down was used to “protect” them. Hmm.

Homosexuals have a legitimate beef with a lot of issues (I’ve had people tell me I was going to burn in hell for kissing my wife) but in this case it isn’t that it’s illegal for homosexuals to get an artificial insemination, it’s that this particular doctor didn’t want to do it, but did recommend the couple to someone who would. While these doctors thought processes might be a little outdated and I really, really wish everyone would just unblock their chakras already, they should have been allowed to deny service in the interest of a free society.

Those of us in the fight against the Christian doctors need to be very careful that we don’t adopt the very same methods used to keep us down. No matter what you believe about an argument, when it comes to treading on freedoms, freedom must prevail otherwise we no longer have the luxury of being “right” or “just” anymore.

Here’s an example for you; everyone should have the right to have their marriage recognized by the federal government and have all the government issued rights that go with. However, not every Priest, Rabbi, Preacher, whatever, should be required to perform those marriages. Two very, very different arguments. Even doctors, in a private practice should be given the freedom of choice whether we agree with who they choose to treat or not.

I know that’s a bold statement to make, and can pull in a lot of very sensitive issues, and trust me, I wish people were not discriminatory and loved everyone (and I believe that one day this retarded system is going to come crashing down and we will be cool like that) but in the interest of a free society that right now is currently stripping away so many of our rights behind our backs because the current popular opinion that being safe is better than being free, we must, even if we don’t agree with the argument surrounding it, support freedom of choice. Otherwise, we’re not a democracy anymore and we might as well walk willingly into those concentration camps.

What I find even more f’d up about this case is that ABC news reports: “The Supreme Court did order a trial court to consider whether the Christian doctors were allowed to refuse inseminating Benitez because she was unmarried.”

I really wish everyone would unblock their chakras and get right all ready. So, the issue of whether a doctor can use his religious beliefs to refuse service is not even a question. But whether or not this woman was married might be an issue. Wow. Wow. To be completely honest that’s not really the sort of governing body I want making ANY decisions on my behalf.

It is issues like these that simply renforce my belief that the entire system is fucked, needs to be scratched and we need to start rewriting it completely. But first and foremost we all have a lot of internal work to do. We can’t expect the system to be a reflection of anything but us so if we want it to get better we must be better. We must be the change we wish to see reflected in the world. And freedom in all its many difficult forms must be the first answer.

Isn’t that what were fighting for in the first place?

Namaste’

DCS