I think I would read "Court weights if doctors cannot treat lesbian" as a malpractice trial, as in the doctors were not capable of providing treatment as opposed to their choosing not to do so. But maybe that's my bias coloring the context...
I tend to be a descriptivist about most usage rules, especially if there's no change in meaning, but of course I see a change in meaning here, and those I tend to cling to. ;) But I can accept a difference as regional, or a distinction dying out, if there's enough evidence. Partly, that sign jumps out at me because I don't see "can not" used very often.
And yes, good to see you! :) Things are well enough here. How are you?
Re: Curious.
I tend to be a descriptivist about most usage rules, especially if there's no change in meaning, but of course I see a change in meaning here, and those I tend to cling to. ;) But I can accept a difference as regional, or a distinction dying out, if there's enough evidence. Partly, that sign jumps out at me because I don't see "can not" used very often.
And yes, good to see you! :) Things are well enough here. How are you?