A local law or ordinance in one town is not applicable in another. The local Population is not ignoring the law, it does not apply to them. Just because NH (and every other state in the nation) allows me to carry a gun does not mean I can legally do it in NY State.

 

Separation of church and state is federal law. :P

 

Show me the federal law that explicitly states that there is a seperation of Church and state where the State cannot have any interaction with religion.

Our Constitution specifically states that there shall be no ESTABLISHMENT of religion. Support religion is not establishing religion. That clause was put in the Constitution to prohibit lawmakers from making this a Catholic, or Protestant, or Jewish nation where religion and government are intertwined and the people are forced to worship that religion only.

 

You're right. Unfortunetly, this administration has praised and promotes private non-profit organizations with strong religious affiliations.

Religion Trumps Regulation as Legal Exemptions Grow:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/bu...religious.html

Where Faith Abides, Employees Have Few Rights

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/bu...religious.html

...and taking it further, I find it ironic that pharmacists are allowed descretion as to who is allowed the "morning after pill", and prescribed birth control. Even worse, hospitols that have religious affiliations have full descretion as far as rape victims go. If 13 year old Angela is raped and ends up in ER at St. Josephs instead of *insert name here* hospital, it's up to the hospitol to decide if abortion is an option — regardless of state law.

Makes me sick.

 

You hit the nail on the head.

As for your question, our town council has wrestled with the problem. No Manger scenes on township property allowed regardless of funding source.

Now, the loophole.

During the "Winter Festival" any and all religious affiliations are allowed to petition for sidewalk space. Ostensibly, this is for the purpose of providing drinks/food/entertainment to the townsfolk. The catch is that there are NO limitations on the sidewalk displays.

 

Why?

They still have the option of getting services elsewhere. In a Missouri case, Doe vs. Poelker the state is required to have a facility capable of meeting this demand. The patient just has to be reffered to a treating physician that does not have any qualms about performing the proceedure.

This is a good thing. Then the state/feds can't MAKE a doctor or hospital perform a proceedure against their moral or religious convictions.

 

This is illegal in South Dakota. And this is a pressing argument among many other states. This is still in question and not a federal law. Regardless, you are only debating half of my argument.

 

Andy, I thought that pharmacists had the right to not dispense BC or the morning after pill for religous reasons but someone else in the pharmacy could. If this is the case I have nothing wrong with that but you are right, they should not be able to arbitrarily decide who does and does not get birth control or the morning after pill.

As far as hopitals go, if they are a privately funded religous hospital then by all means they have that right to decide not to perform abortions or provide the morning after pill. Any time I have been in an ambulance I have been given the option of what hospital to go to, the religious or the state/private funded secular hospital. People have a choice on where they go and if it is life or death it should not make a difference. I know abortion can be life or death sometimes when there is a complication in the pregnancy and in those instances I think the abortion is allowed to save the life of the mother.

 

IMHO I think this should be left to the States to decide by a refferendum voted on by the people.

 

double post.