talloulou

I've never heard of an attending physician hired solely or even mostly to do abortions. The very idea is patently ridiculous.

As for clinics even planned parenthood pretends abortions are only "a piece" a "small part" a "drop in the bucket" -(no pun intended), of what they do. If thats the case then surely there's plenty for nurses and physicians who aren't willing to do abortions to do.

prometeus

That is not the argument or the point. But if a facility does provide the service, then the attending personnel should be able to fulfill the job .

I am sure there are plenty, but they may not all be on duty all the time. Why would anyone opposed to abortion want to work in a place where they perform them?

DeeJayH

almost thanked you for this point, but sometimes you just have to eat
not me, but some people

__________________
These days it seems that the deadliest place on earth for an American to be is inside the womb. - Joshua P. Allem

OKgrannie

Does a hospital exist that doesn't receive federal funding? I don't think so. It may not advocate hiring ONLY prolifer types, but it does state unequivocally that pro-life views may NOT be the basis for not hiring them.

Stealth Assault on Reproductive Rights

"Last month, Health and Human Services issued a draft of new regulations which would require health-care providers who receive federal funds to accept as employees nurses and other workers who object to abortion and even to most kinds of birth control. This rule would cover some 500,000 hospitals, clinics, and other medical facilities-- including family planning clinics, which would, absurdly, legally be bound to hire people who will obstruct their very mission. To refuse to hire them, or to fire them, would be to lose funds for discriminating against people who object to abortion for religious or --get this -- moral beliefs.

This represents quite an expansion of health workers' longstanding right not to be involved in abortion. And, incidentally, this respect for moral beliefs only goes one way. A Catholic hospital has no corresponding obigation to hire pro-choice workers or accomodate their moral beliefs by permitting them to offer emergency contraception to rape victims or hand out condoms to the HIV positive; a "crisis pregnancy center" would not have to hire pro-choice counsellors who would tell women that abortion would not really give them breast cancer or leave them sterile. Only anti-choicers, apparently, have moral beliefs that entitle them to jobs they refuse to actually perform.

There are several disturbing elements to this story. One is that even as it fades into history, the Bush Administration is catering to the anti-choice movement's larger agenda of making contraception harder to obtain. What Bush can't give them legislatively, he'll provide administratively, in bits and pieces, under cover of granting workers rights of conscience (the only workers' rights he seems to care about). Remember when it seemed just plain bizarre that a pharmacist could refuse to fill a woman's prescription for emergency contraception or even the Pill? Now pharmacists have that explicit right in four states, and possibly in five more. "

__________________
The greatest danger to liberty lurks in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.---Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

Ethereal

That's because it isn't a big deal. If 1069 couldn't find Snidely Whiplash she'd just tie herself to the railroad tracks. The only difference is that nobody would try to save her...