Final answer:
It is false that an officer may legally refuse to touch a homosexual inmate due to religious convictions.
Officers are obligated to perform their duties without discrimination, and not doing so can be professional misconduct and violate inmate rights. Laws have evolved to protect LGBTQ+ individuals from such discrimination.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question deals with the legal obligations of an officer in the context of religious convictions and homosexuality. It is false that an officer may legally refuse to touch a homosexual inmate if they have religious convictions against homosexuality.
Government employees, including correctional officers, are required to perform their duties without discrimination. This includes providing equal treatment to all inmates regardless of sexual orientation. Refusing to perform job responsibilities based on personal religious beliefs can be deemed as professional misconduct and a violation of the inmate's rights.
Institutional religion and government regulations have historically clashed on the topic of homosexuality. Despite the deep-seated oppression of the LGBTQ+ community due to religious narratives, the law in the United States has evolved significantly.
Particularly, since the 1960s and 1970s and more explicitly from 2003 after the Supreme Court invalidated the criminalization of same-sex acts, discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals under the guise of personal religious convictions is not legally permissible in the context of an officer's duties.
This evolution reflects a shift from earlier practices such as the military discharging soldiers for homosexuality, and law enforcement investigating individuals for same-sex acts.
Today, while personal religious beliefs are respected, they do not take precedence over the lawful and non-discriminatory execution of official duties within the criminal justice system.