>http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/28/court-university-expel-student-opposes-homosexuality/
>
>Sexual deviation will soon be mandatory.
>
>If I read the report correct, this is the 1% of the time where I see it differently.
>
>"..she refused to counsel homosexual clients.".
>
>I'll be the first to say that I don't care for some of the political lobbying that has gone on for certain public interest groups (and this is one of them). But if this woman indeed refused to counsel homosexual clients, then AFAIAC the dismissal was warranted. If I (hypothetically) refused to help one of my students because of similar views, I would expect to get the boot as well.
>
>So unless there's more to this story, I don't see the issue.

I disagree with Bill probably more often than you agree with him. But, other than the reduced-to-way-beyond-absurdity title and comment, there is a point to be made.

Where do you draw the line on when refusal to help would be warranted?

Communist?
Nazi?

Jew?
Muslim?
Satanist?
Atheist?

Black?
Asian?
White?

Physical disfigurement?

Pregnant out of wedlock?
Polygamist?
Polyandrist?

What situation would cause you to refuse to counsel an individual?