please, accelerate. create more people with nothing left to lose .. then hopefully soon, these judeo-commies will lose everything from such a person one day.
That's how private businesses work. The SCOTUS just confirmed that it's perfectly fine to not do business with people whose life choices you disagree with.
which ruling was that? if you're talking about the bake the cake ruling, no that is not what they ruled. they ruled that a shop owner does not have to provide custom works if it goes against their personal beliefs. writing two male names on a wedding cake is a prime example, but providing a wedding cake without names is not an example and is also what the shop owner offered to do. he didn't refuse service, he just refused the custom service that they demanded of him.
applying that ruling here, unless the doctors or nurses are ideologically opposed to the idea of chemotherapy, refusing service for this patient would be discriminatory. they have every right to, say, refuse to give her a tattoo that says kill all trans people. but refusing chemotherapy crosses the line because it has nothing to do with her ideological stance on trannys.
Discriminated against, as a disabled woman. She's going to own that hospital of this stung doesn't kill her.
Where does the hospital administrstor live?
please, accelerate. create more people with nothing left to lose .. then hopefully soon, these judeo-commies will lose everything from such a person one day.
That's how private businesses work. The SCOTUS just confirmed that it's perfectly fine to not do business with people whose life choices you disagree with.
Federal funding says you're wrong.
which ruling was that? if you're talking about the bake the cake ruling, no that is not what they ruled. they ruled that a shop owner does not have to provide custom works if it goes against their personal beliefs. writing two male names on a wedding cake is a prime example, but providing a wedding cake without names is not an example and is also what the shop owner offered to do. he didn't refuse service, he just refused the custom service that they demanded of him.
applying that ruling here, unless the doctors or nurses are ideologically opposed to the idea of chemotherapy, refusing service for this patient would be discriminatory. they have every right to, say, refuse to give her a tattoo that says kill all trans people. but refusing chemotherapy crosses the line because it has nothing to do with her ideological stance on trannys.
If it goes against their personal beliefs to treat a demented bigot, why should that not be acceptable?
The works themselves have to go against belief, not the customer. They would have to be ideologically opposed to chemo therapy to refuse service.
Feel free to reach out to the woman and give her legal advice. You seem to be an expert.
oh look, its the
ending