Where in the constitution does it say the government has the right to tell a business owner to sell a certain line of product? Maybe the car czar will get away with it, but not for long.

Your sister can go to hundreds of clinics to get free pills.

You’ve described the attitude of probably a majority of uniformed officers in the U.S. But they all do their sworn duty.

I would not want my child being taught six-day creationism or intelligent design either. Not only is it wrong it’s unbelief in the grip of scientism.

But it’s not for me or you, or the government to tell any parent where to educate their children. That responsibility is in the first instance parental not statist.

You make a far-reaching claim that some professions should not allow moral beliefs.

You mean like lawyers?

Seriously, attempts to compartmentalize life as if facts or science or social policy are by themselves religiously neutral is patently false, harmful, and makes for failed social policies. How do teachers or parents educate children about what the “good life” is without talking about the most deeply held beliefs that no one can prove. Same for abortion clinics, lawyers, astrophysicists, and politicians.

To assume the government has some innate power to dictate what will be considered an acceptable worldview over another needs to be re-evaluated. For down that road lies true bigotry and discrimination.

I grant you this happens on both sides of the liberal ideological spectrum from left and right. Each side thinks they should own 100%.

What we need instead is true pluralism that recognizes diversity of religious thought in our communities, and pluralism that understands societal structures have their own responsibility and are not just creatures of the state. Representation should also be pluralistic via some form of preference voting and proportional representation.

how many pharmacists go into their field not knowing that they’ll be asked to fill prescriptions for birth control?

how many women in this country use birth control? my sister is on the pill not for contraception but to help regulate her period; would it be okay for a pharmacist to deny her the medicine or is that okay?

anyway, its a moot point; Congress will overturn this law and hopefully, a Court will issue an injunction against the rule not allowing it to go into effect

moral beliefs had no place in certain professions; would you want a cop who doesn’t believe that it’s moral to kill someone no matter what? I certainly wouldn’t want a science teacher who believes that the earth was created in six days teaching my kids

Then people are free to go whatever pharmacy they want to find the product or service they are looking for whether it is poison to kill your elderly grandfather or a morning after pill. Why put the onus on one pharmacist that believes assisted suicide and 1.3 million abortions a year is murder.

What are you going to do, force the pharmacist to provide reproductive advice?

Please. Typcical totalitarian statist over reach.

Bigoted irreligion that you suggest has no business making laws that restrict freedom of religion on either side of the equation, so that people can seek out the choice and not be told what to do by an overreaching government run by secular THEOology.

and BGR, how about racists-do you want racists refusing to assist someone because of their color

and are you in favor of allowing pharmacists to not fill prescriptions for say HIV medicines because they think that AIDS is God’s punishment and to assist those living with HIV is a sin?

- decertify doctors who won’t perform abortions or assisted suicide
- refuse to license adoption agencies that decline to place children in GLBT homes
- decertify public school teachers that refuse to teach Gay marriage as normal
- decertify dangerous thoughts by homeschooling parents
- harass congregations that don’t kneel to the the new secular catechism, similar to looking the other way at violence against No on 8 supporters.
- refuse to relicense private Christian, Hebrew day schools or Day Care
- refuse funding to partially state funded hospitals and other mercy institution
- defund social service agencies that don’t play along

Hayashi’s law must be challenged immediately, in court, as it violates both clauses of the 1st amendment as it attempts establishment of (ir)religion and violates the Make No Law clause against free exercise.