Republican in Idaho Wants to Allow Doctors and Morticians to Refuse Service to Gays

GOP Lawmaker Seeks To Allow Doctors, Morticians To Refuse Service To Gays
by DAVID BADASH on FEBRUARY 12, 2014

A Republican state lawmaker in Idaho is pushing a bill that would protect any licensed professional who wishes to refuse service to anyone on the claim of “religious objection.” Rep. Lynn Luker’s bill would allow a doctor to refuse to treat a gay person, or a mortician to refuse to bury a woman, if doing so would be contrary to the teachings of their religion. Emergency services would not be included, but the definition of emergency is subject to whose discretion?

In essence, Rep. Luker is trying to get the state’s licensing board to issue licenses to discriminate. The Idaho Bureau of Occupational Licenses (IBOL) issues licenses to:

Athlete Agents
Acupuncturists
Architectural Examiners
Athletic Commission
Barber Examiners
Chiropractors
Contractors
Cosmetologists
Counselors / Marriage & Family Therapists
Denturists
Driving Businesses
Geologists
Landscape Architects
Liquefied Petroleum Gas Dealers
Massage Therapists
Midwives
Morticians
Nursing Home Administrators
Occupational Therapists
Optometrists
Physical Therapists
Podiatrists
Psychologists
Residential Care Administrators
Real Estate Appraisers
Speech And Hearing Services
Shorthand Reporters
Social Workers
Water & Wastewater Professionals

All these licensed professionals, in addition to doctors, midwives, physical therapists, and nurses, would not have to treat or otherwise deliver services to gay people or others depending on any claim of religious objection.

KBOI notes that “Luker, a Boise Republican, knows of no example in Idaho of an actual challenge to a professional’s license on these grounds. Still, he points to efforts by gays and lesbians elsewhere seeking to end what they contend is discrimination against them as a sign Idaho must act quickly to protect the faithful before something similar arises closer to home.”

“This is pre-emptive,” Luker said. “The issue is coming, whether it’s 10 years, or 15 years, or two years.”

Of course, this is a two-way street. A person who is a Muslim might decide they won’t do business with a Christian. Rep. Luker is a Mormon, according to his bio, and has fathered eight chidden. What if in the town of Boise, where he serves, his wife couldn’t have found a doctor to deliver their children? Or an appraiser if they wanted to sell their home?

Does the bill apply to atheists? Could an atheist invoke a conscientious objection to doing business with a Catholic? Could an agnostic refuse to deliver liquefied petroleum gas to the home of a Jewish person?

The possibilities are endless.

Hypocritically, Luker’s campaign website claims:

My view is that every proposed law should be carefully examined to determine:

Is government action really required?
Are constitutional rights preserved?

Writing discrimination into the law is not only moving society backwards, it invites hate and intolerance.