Religious
freedom bills have become a very controversial topic in the past few months,
with many states passing bills that allow for individuals with sincerely held
beliefs to refuse service to individuals whose practices do not align with
these beliefs. Mississippi, North Carolina, and Kansas are just a few examples
of states that have created this type of legislation in 2016. Most recently in
Tennessee, a religious freedom law
has passed that allows for therapists to assert their free exercise of religion
rights. These therapists can refuse service to an LGBT patient on the basis of
their religious objections. There are also two key provisions to this law that
Governor Bill Haslam pointed out- one is that if the patient is in imminent
danger to either themselves or others, services cannot be refused. The other is
that the therapist must organize a referral for the client to another therapist
who is better suited to him or her.
Proponents of the bill see it as giving therapists the same
rights as lawyers or doctors by allowing them to choose their clients and work
with those who they feel they can help to the best of their abilities. Governor
Haslam said, in favor of the bill, “The substance of this bill doesn’t address
a group, issue or belief system. Rather, it allows counselors-just as we allow
other professionals like doctors and lawyers- to refer a client to another
counselor when the goals or behaviors would violate a sincerely held principle.
I believe it is reasonable to allow these professionals to determine if and
when an individual would be better served by another counselor better suited to
meet his or her needs”. The Tennessee director of the American Civil Liberties
Union, Hedy Weinberg, disagrees, and instead sees this law as legalizing
blatant discrimination against the LGBT community and said, “This measure is
rooted in the dangerous misconception that religion can be used as a free pass
to discriminate”. Those in opposition also see it as a reaction to marriage
equality laws and an attack on the LGBT community as a whole.
This
case is similar to one we heard about last week- Andrew Cash was taken out of the counseling program at Missouri
State University because of his religious objections to gay marriage and his
refusal to counsel gay couples. With both this bill in Tennessee and the Andrew
Cash case, the issue revolves around a conflict between free exercise of
religion and discrimination. This is also similar to other examples of religious
freedom laws, such as the laws in Missouri that permit shop owners to deny
services to individuals based on their sincerely held religious beliefs.
I
believe that this religious freedom law in Tennessee is constitutional. It
protects the free exercise of religion rights of individuals who have sincerely
held beliefs. These therapists that do not feel as if they can be most
beneficial to LGBT patients should have the right to refer them to another
therapist who they feel is better suited to help. No individual should be
forced, by law, to act in ways that go against their religious convictions. To
do so would be violating their constitutional rights as citizens. Furthermore,
the clients themselves would most likely benefit more from working with a
therapist who wants to help them, rather than being forced into a professional
relationship with a therapist who is not the best match for them. The client is
never being completely denied services- rather, they are being placed with a
therapist who is a good match for them, which other professions allow for now.
What
do you think? Does this law protect the free exercise rights of therapists? Or
does it discriminate against the LGBT community?
2 comments:
I am a little torn on this issues, but ultimately come down siding against you. The job of a therapist to to serve all those who need you- not just those who have views that align with yours. is denying someone based on their marital status any different than denying someone based on gender? how far can this discrimination go? When you become a therapist, you are agreeing to treat all people. If your religion prevent you from doing so, you should find a different profession that allows you to practice your religion.
This is definitely a controversial bill. I believe my final judgement on this case is that I agree with you. Although I understand that people may believe this will lead to discrimination, I believe it is important to remember that every citizen still deserves their freedom of religion. Therefore, I believe it is the therapist's right to refuse service if they would be forced to say something that goes against their religion. I believe this comes from the sense that the government can not force a citizen to say something or give up their religion.
Post a Comment