| Mr Khan said: It's ultimately a moot point. We should have universal health coverage, and the gutless government is doing so in a way that happens to force religious institutions to betray some of their values. The Obama Administration shouldn't be doing this, but the "why" of it has little to do with religion. |
Another example I could of used is how a homosexual activist forced a Christian film development studio to develop a promotional film for homosexuality, by means of the courts. The activist argued they had a right to not be denied service, and pitted that said right against the owners of the company to say they didn't want to be involved with anything they saw as promoting sin.
EHarmony.com ran into another one. They offered their service for heterosexuals only, as their market. They were sued in court to require offering their matching services for homosexuals. To placate these requirements, eharmony.com ended up setting up a separate service. I know of eharmony, because Dr. Warren targeted his research at churches in the beginning.
Again, you see over and over what people considered rights in continual conflict with other people's rights. And these rights end up individual or collectively. The rights-based ethical systems don't provide any answers for prioritizing.
