I was thinking about another news worthy comparable story here.   It's the upcoming Supreme Court Case about the father who sued the Kansas Church Group (don't even want to say their name) that protested with lots of hate speech at his son's military funeral.  

The judge turned the case around saying the father of the dead soldier has to pay the court costs to this very hateful church group saying he was violating their freedom of speech by suing them over it. 

So if they can get away in the name of free speech by protesting hateful words at a soldier's funeral how can this doctor get in trouble with his freedom of speech?   Why is it he is walking a thin line when that church group is constantly using their free speech to spew hatred and animosity big time? 

That doctor has the right to his opinion.   I think its a bit extreme but if he's willing to lose patients over it that's his business.  You're right he may even gain patients.  From what I understand he is in a more conservative area so it might not have been such a big risk to take. 

I feel so badly for the father of that Marine.  Like it wouldn't be horrible enough to lose your son but to have to deal with that garbage when you're trying to bury him is awful.  Then the salt in the wound of having the courts say, you have to pay their legal bills.  

I was glad to see that Bill O'Reilly and others have offered to cover those court costs for the dad.  I am wondering what statement the Supreme Court is going to make on free speech.  I am all for free speech but this crosses the line of decency in a civilized society.  That isn't to say I agree with Phelp's message in the slightest.  I don't know how anyone could.

I have mixed feelings on this. There are some area's of my life were I don't want politics, and health care is one of those areas. That said, this administration has injected government into this area and if this this bill causes clinics to cut back or ration their services, then people deserve to know the cause. This clinic doesn't treat emergencies, so in effect is not denying life or death care to an individual. I don't think it will be good for the doctor because the MSM will probably twist it into a racial thing, as that seems to be the common response in the Obama era. It is a private clinic so there are freedom of speech issues, and the doctor still has rights. I believe when this thing gears up, you'll just see more clinics and private practices refusing to take Medicare or whatever the government plan is, of course then it will be too late and will require even further government intervention. People always want the other guy to work for a cut rate, but heck no when it comes to their profession. Slippery slope indeed.

I think he is doing the right thing.

Gutsy?  Maybe.  I think it is a zero sum game.  He may lose a patient or 2, but probably pick up whatever he loses.  I applaud him.  Even if I totally agreed with the new law, I admire someone who stands up on principal.

There is also the issue that "free Speech" is only free from government control.  Not private screening.  In other words, you are free to let out a string of 4 letter words on a street corner.  However, you do it in your place of employment, and your boss can fire you for it.  I think this is going to come down to whether this is a public display or private display.  I for one do not see how a funeral is a public event.

I totally agree.

Although I think we both agree that one shouldn't even call that group a "church group".

this is true and maybe he's so well established it doesn't really matter.  When my husband was in business for himself after a few years he could be a bit more picky on his clientel.  In the beginning he had no choice but as the years went on he did.  Maybe it's the same here as well. 

If I'm hurting and in need of care, I guess it really doesn't matter what religion or political party one is affiliated with. I want the benefit of their expertise.  But if having a choice I would go to one that I knew I could most relate to.  Most don't put themselves out there like this so most of the time you don't have any idea.  I'm wondering how many others will be as forward as this guy. 

me either.  I was appalled when I heard about this story.  And even more appalled at the outcome of the decision in court. 

I know.  I wince when I use the word "church" in this sense.  The church is supposed to be the body of Christ.  This is certainly a body run amok because there is no way it's listening to its head!!  Really it's a body that doesn't belong to the head that I belong to. 

Agree and...

agree.

Maybe it's just me, but it appears that there are forces at work to paint all "Churches" in the same light as these idiots protesting funerals. I'll even go a step further and say this growing force is directed at religion in general. Not being so religious myself, I can imagine how it might appear to those that are. I have no problem with someone finding comfort in a belief system, so long as that system harms no one.

I believe the "forces" are just the left's attempt to distort and minimize religion in life.  To them, A Jim Jones is the same as an Oral Roberts.  But notice how they howl when someone tries to equate nationalizing portions of the US economy to socialism.  As if they needed it, a far left professor, George Lakoff, is teaching them how to redefine the english language.

You're treading on a subject that is near and dear to my heart here.  I believe the churches today are taking a hit big time.  They are in deep trouble.  They are being attacked not only by the outside forces but also by the inside.   The most severe damage comes from within. 

Many inside the churches are adorning, amending or adjusting the truth of Scripture to suit their own agendas as in the case of the Kansas wacko group.  Many generations of believers are in a perpetual state of arrested spiritual development because Pastors have gone off and majored on their own opinions, emotions and entertainment and minored on biblical content. 

I read this today written by a Pastor that we support:  "Western evangelicals had been gradually losing interest in biblical preaching and doctrinal instruction for decades.  The church in America had become weak, worldly and man-centered.  Evangelical ears were itching for something more hip and entertaining than biblical preaching and business-savvy evangelical pundits declared that it was foolish not to give people what they demanded."

Churches are starving spiritually and overdosiing on stuff that's bad for them.  I can't help but think of the prophecy of Amos in the OT Scripture that said there will come a time when there will be a famine for the true Word of God.  While there have been periods of time in the past this was true this same time is here now. 

These trends are pervasive but thank God there is always a remnant as many faithful churches and pastors, models for integrity, are still standing.  They are not, however the public face of the church.  Too often it's the bad churches/pastors that we are most associated with. 

Absolutely.

I applaud the urologist's stand, too.  Some principles are worth more than money.  While our professionalism dictates we remain non-judgmental, we are under no obligation to submit to de facto indentured servitude.  Physicians have allowed & rationalized incremental enslavement on the basis of 'the patient comes first' but there comes a point where further submission is not sustainable, to borrow a phrase.

It's not a matter of doctors bringing politics into the exam room; the politicians brought it into the exam room, against our wishes, long ago.

YET.

I've heard of nurses being told they had to work on abortion floors of a hospital when it went against their convictions.  I had a nurse acquaintance that this became an issue years ago.  Not sure how she worked it out but she did so she didn't have to but she was in jeopardy of losing her job.