Court Rules That Gender Concerns Override Religious Principles

Epoch Times-

A woman diagnosed with gender dysphoria can sue a Catholic hospital for refusing to surgically remove her uterus as part of the sex-reassignment process, despite the hospital’s religious objection to performing the operation, an appeals court in California ruled.

The ruling pits competing legal interests against each other, elevating civil rights concerns involving sexual orientation and gender identity over the right of religious institutions to adhere to their sincerely held beliefs in the provision of services.

The Court of Appeals of California ruled Sept. 17 in Minton v. Dignity Health that Dignity Health violated California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act by withholding the medical care that Evan Minton requested. The appeals court revived Minton’s lawsuit, sending it back for further consideration to San Francisco Superior Court, which previously dismissed the action.

Minton, who identifies as a man, had initiated hormone replacement therapy in 2012 and had a mastectomy in 2014, and intended to complete the hysterectomy before undergoing phalloplasty to complete the transition, Catholic News Agency reports.

Minton, who was represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, claimed in the lawsuit that Sacramento-area Mercy San Juan Medical Center, operated by Dignity Health, canceled a scheduled hysterectomy when the patient told a nurse she identified as transgendered.

“The refusal of Dignity Health to allow a doctor to perform this common procedure simply because the patient is transgender is discriminatory,” Elizabeth Gill, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU of Northern California, said when the lawsuit was filed. “This is a hospital that is open to the general public, so it’s illegal for them to turn away someone based on gender identity.”

According to the appeals court, the hospital’s refusal to perform the operation as originally scheduled caused Minton “great anxiety and grief.” Minton “experienced a startling and painful notification that the surgery would not go forward” and the cancellation itself constituted “discrimination.”

But within 72 hours of the cancellation, Dignity Health arranged for Minton to have the surgery performed at a nearby non-Catholic hospital within the network. Minton had the surgery and sued anyway. more here

22 Comments on Court Rules That Gender Concerns Override Religious Principles

  1. The origins and current debate on so-called “gender dysphoria” need to be brought front and center to the public square. We all need to know the political big wheels who are involved in this and why. This entire rigmarole currently exists way out on the fringe for a lot of people and yet this has all the makings of another national health crisis, and this particular story involves another aspect of the ideological agenda — lawfare against Christians. And it’s based on what? Just as they were able to cause incredible social unrest, property damage and violence over the lie of Trayvon Martin and “Black Lives Matter”, the Left is now turning what is actually — by all medically responsible accounts — a mental illness into a weapon of lawfare against normal society.

  2. Welp. There goes the Catholic hospitals as charity public care. To save themselves, they’ll probably convert to private subscription, must apply to be accepted – like a private country club or private golf course.

    This is why we can’t have nice things.

  3. Anything that is an affront to God and his laws will be pushed into the ruling position over any religious objections to its forced practice.

    Unless the religion is Islam.

    That’s what the first amendment means in today’s courts.

  4. This queer court says that religion has to bow to the wishes of the mentally unbalanced who are living in their own fantasy world. A sex change operation is not scientifically based. It’s delusion based.

    Congress has the power to do away with these judges and courts who foist this crap on normal people.

    When i’m in congress, I pledge to take the bull by the horns and fire these judges.

  5. All started because the perverts just wanted to get married and have equal tax treatment. But we said this is a can of worms that should stay closed. And now the worms are running the courts.

  6. This kind of nonsense makes me think I am not a real person living in a sane world, and that instead I am only a fictional character in a bizarre satire novel wherein nutty plaintiffs & even nuttier court judges are the heroes of the story and the sane characters are portrayed as being the fools.

  7. “First – do no harm …”

    Is it harmful to perform surgery on a healthy individual to satisfy a neurosis?
    Why should sound medicine be trumped by mental illness?

    Our courts increasingly display themselves as partisan participants in a Mephistophelean Tragedy as opposed to their pretended pursuit of justice.

    izlamo delenda est …

  8. I’m confused. What difference does it make to the hospital why the woman wanted her uterus removed, so long as her attending physician/surgeon were on board with it. It’s a common operation that’s done for a lot of reasons, both serious and arguably unnecessary.

    A lot of cosmetic surgery also is done for stupid reasons. Do hospitals get involved in second-guessing the reasons for these too? This isn’t akin to a hospital refusing abortions, assisted suicide, or living will (pull the plug) advance directives.

  9. Janitor: It is, or used to be, unethical to remove healthy organs for ANY reason. It’s a Catholic hospital, sex change is against Catholic doctrine. There are many secular hospitals that would allow the surgery, in fact the Hospital in question even made arrangements for the patient to go to one of those. Not good enough. This lawsuit was designed to attack the Catholic Church. Period.

  10. The Catholic Church in CA is a huge supporter of
    the gov’t with illegals entering. Not so much with
    abortion. Serving two masters never works.
    “When you sup with the devil you’d best use a long spoon.”

  11. Janitor, in addition to Tony R’s on-point comments, for a Catholic church to sanction removing healthy organs would be tantamount to the church claiming God had made a mistake that they (man) was going to correct. Doesn’t work.

  12. “We just want to be left alone to love who we want to love,” they said. Wrong. Marriage is a religious institution that the state shouldn’t be involved in. That stance would have sidestepped most of this quagmire, but the alphabet mafia forcing religious people to their knees to serve aims antithetical to religious teaching is despicable behavior.

  13. Tony R, doctors remove healthy uteruses all the time, prophylactically, e.g. when there is cancer in another organ, when a woman has multiple removable polyps but is past menopause, and for other reasons. Elective hysterectomies are done for both good and bad reasons.

    For the rest: if this case is taken to the Supreme Court it will lose.

    Elective hysterectomy is not akin to abortion or assisted suicide, and her reasons for it simply are not the hospital personnel’s business.

  14. RacerX, so you’re okay with personnel at hospitals of various and sundry persuasions deciding on whether it’s okay to do any kind of cosmetic surgery? Or anything regarding prenatal birth defects? Because “God doesn’t make mistakes”? Does that also apply to God letting people get this or that disease?

  15. She picked a Catholic hospital and told them what she was up to so she could cash in on the gay version of the ghetto lottery. It’s all the rage these days.

    We gave them the inch they said they wanted, and now they’re going to drag us in chains behind their Subarus for every mile they can get out of us.


Comments are closed.