Obama rolls back Bush “conscience rule”
posted at 8:55 am on March 2, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Barack Obama began the process of rolling back one of the more notable rules imposed in the final weeks of the Bush administration, the “conscience rule” regarding abortion counseling and contraception access. The rule generated a lot of heat from pro-choice groups, including Planned Parenthood, and its repeal has provoked cries of outrage from their opponents. The rule, though, was never as onerous as described, nor will its repeal mean forcing doctors to perform abortions:
Taking another step into the abortion debate, the Obama administration today will move to rescind a controversial rule that allows healthcare workers to deny abortion counseling or other family planning services if doing so would violate their moral beliefs, according to administration officials.
The rollback of the so-called conscience rule comes just two months after the Bush administration announced it late last year in one of its final policy initiatives.
The new administration’s action seems certain to stoke ideological battles between supporters and opponents of abortion rights over the responsibilities of doctors, nurses and other medical workers to their patients.
Some have taken this to mean that the government will force doctors to provide abortions. The rule didn’t actually protect doctors from government-imposed abortions. They already had that protection of conscience in federal law, as the Los Angeles Times reports, and the rule didn’t change that. Instead, it extended the protection of conscience to a much wider range of activities, such as dispensing contraceptive pills and devices and discussion of contraception and abortion as therapeutic options. Because the Bush administration could not have passed such a wide-ranging protection into law through a Democratic Congress, it had to use the rules process, which is easily reversed in succeeding administrations.
In fact, one has to wonder how committed the Bush administration was to this rule in the first place. It didn’t bother to propose the conscience rule as law when Republicans controlled Congress, nor did it create the rule until the final weeks of their tenure in the White House. Obama’s rollback just puts the medical industry back to the same status it held in September of last year. It looks more like a poison pill for the Obama administration, giving them a political hotfoot and the pro-life movement an easy rallying point early in Obama’s first term.
Still, this rollback says something about the Obama administration’s priorities. While the freedom of religion is explicitly guaranteed in the Constitution, the Roe right to an abortion is implied through emanations and penumbras — but the Obama administration appears more concerned with the latter than the former. Patients who don’t like doctors who won’t discuss abortion or prescribe contraception can see another doctor; they can also find another pharmacist if the neighborhood pharmacy won’t fill a prescription for the Pill. The free market works out those issues on its own without government sticking its nose into it and forcing providers to violate their religious tenets to stay in business.
Isn’t the government busy with more pressing matters at the moment?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
One would think so…
ladyingray on March 2, 2009 at 8:58 AM
His agenda if first and foremost on his mind. Screw the economy, socialism must be number 1 for him.
genso on March 2, 2009 at 8:58 AM
I am hoping there is a strong backlash on this. Catholic hospitals, remember what you promised to do in this situation? This guy is due for a really hard fall.
zeebeach on March 2, 2009 at 9:00 AM
A leopard can not change its spots. Supporting abortion was a priority for him as a Senator (along with endless campaigning)and it still is.
kingsjester on March 2, 2009 at 9:01 AM
Government coercion is in style these days.
Except for elite tax evaders.
Greg Toombs on March 2, 2009 at 9:02 AM
But if anyone dares to put an Abort Obama bumper sticker on their car you’ll face arrest and condemnation.
JammieWearingFool on March 2, 2009 at 9:02 AM
So very true.
becki51758 on March 2, 2009 at 9:03 AM
This is un-American to force anyone to do anything. Irrelevant to anyone’s stand on abortion, this is so alarming that government is now forcing medical practitioners to do “something.” If they can do this, what else is the government going to make the citizens do that they don’t want to?
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
franklinslocke on March 2, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Not if your job depended on catering to these less pressing “matters”.
Obama was elected to do exactly what he is doing…he gets an “A” from planned parenthood.
right2bright on March 2, 2009 at 9:06 AM
That all depends on how the rules are written for universal health care…
myrenovations on March 2, 2009 at 9:07 AM
This will come as crushing news to the Conscientious Objectors in the medical profession and one wonders how it can be constitutional. It seems to violate the fundamental right of any American to act according to his or her conscience.
DarkKnight3565 on March 2, 2009 at 9:08 AM
ahh..Planned Parenthood,the most racist organization out there, killing black babies right and left.
Where is Sharpton on this issue?
becki51758 on March 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Actually, this IS one Messiah’s “more pressing matters at the moment”. Got to keep that large pro-death wing of the Marxicrat party happy.
OT- Has anyone been in a book store recently? Last night my daughter pointed out that one would think between magazines and books, there is no news other than Mr. & Mrs. Anointed.
oldleprechaun on March 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM
As usurper and chief, he has little time and he knows it before he must provide the proof that the constitution requires for him to remain legally in office of President.
This being the case, we are going to be in such a pickle because those with the authority refuse to act for the benefit of the country. His entire ticket would be ruled ineligible, so Biden and all his cabinet posts will be voided in addition to all his E.O.’s
Good luck in unraveling this mess.
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM
abortion is a sacrament of the democratic party and the “moderate” wing of the GOP mocks our side of the aisle’s reciprocal ragers and thus on this subject as many others the mules will in the end win.
sven10077 on March 2, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Not at all. President Pelosi would be on board with all of this.
myrenovations on March 2, 2009 at 9:11 AM
God help us all.
OmahaConservative on March 2, 2009 at 9:11 AM
President Ogabe doing his best to make sure that American citizens aren’t “punished” with a baby.
Bishop on March 2, 2009 at 9:12 AM
The Catholic Church vowed to close their hospitals if Obama forced them to perform abortions. This rule doesn’t go that far (but it will be coming…..)
kelley in virginia on March 2, 2009 at 9:12 AM
McCain would be the president as he was the legal choice. Queen Pelosi can never be president in this matter.
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:13 AM
“Conform, or be cast out!”
SlimyBill on March 2, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Steve Taylor, Bad Rap
jgapinoy on March 2, 2009 at 9:15 AM
This is more about forcing hospitals to provide abortion services than it is about forcing individual doctors.
At least for now.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:16 AM
I think first this will impact pharmacists. They have the option now of refusing to dispense abortifacients (RU-468 and misoprostol) and even birth control tablets, despite a doctor’s prescription. No doctor is going to be “forced” to do a surgical procedure against his or her will, ever.
Marcus on March 2, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Remember, some medical people support Glorious Leader’s action on this. The ones that don’t could (unwillingly), end here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-4_Euthanasia_Program
oldleprechaun on March 2, 2009 at 9:17 AM
How dare you all question our Messiah’s wisdom! He knows best, and I’m willing to cede all control over my life over to him.
You all can just be stick in the mud fusspots. We true patriots will be goose-stepping behind our fearless leader.
(/sarc, if you’re too dense to see it yourself)
Pope Linus on March 2, 2009 at 9:18 AM
And this is just another assault on the medical profession. I wonder how long before the talent drain begins?
genso on March 2, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Ed, there’s already a California court decision out there in which it was held that the doctor could not opt-out of performing a medical service which he found objectionable, and I believe it may have been issued only last year. I’m fairly convinced that this is more than just “window-dressing” by either administration. When it comes to the Left, the unenumerated “penumbral” right of abortion will always trump the free exercise of religion, period. Pro-lifers have every reason to fear the desired policies of a pro-choice lobby which fights every conceivable threat to the abortion regime. I mean, we did just elect a president who is comfortable with infanticide so long as the Roe v. Wade decision remains safe.
And look, it’s not just about abortion anyhow. Doctors should never be coerced by the government into betraying their own beliefs. Are we, as Americans, really having to discuss something so fundamental to the concept of liberty?!
[Footnote: I happen to disagree with the application of any federal constitutional amendment to state laws. For instance, how can an amendment which begins with "Congress shall make no law" possibly apply to state governments? Nevertheless, one must unfortunately play the hand that is dealt.]
cackcon on March 2, 2009 at 9:18 AM
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Note to self:
“hospitals” don’t perform anything, “doctors” perform medical procedures.
oldleprechaun on March 2, 2009 at 9:20 AM
The government is a many-headed hydra. It can do lots of things at once. And rest assured, the Messiah will be very busy, for His goals are great — to turn this country into France. Bush helped start us down that path with reckless spending and TARP; Obama, though, will bring us home.
Just answer me this… When we’re all poor, all have crappy socialist health care, permanent 10-12% unemployment, and so forth, will we at LEAST still have women who shave their arms and legs???
Outlander on March 2, 2009 at 9:20 AM
I saw a headline banner on The Globe announcing that “Obama is Gay” at the checkout stand of my supermarket over the weekend.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
fogw on March 2, 2009 at 9:21 AM
If Obama were to be ruled ineligible, I’m pretty sure that the the runner up in the election would be named president.
Though you can’t be sure. Such a situation is not spelled out in the constitution, which gives the court the wiggle room to impose a solution of it’s liking. (not that the SC needs much wiggle room to go that route)
On the other hand, the chances of this SC declaring Barry ineligible run from slim to none, regardless of the evidence, or lack of evidence presented.
Interesting scenario. Let’s say Barry has had a chance to nominate one or two justices, then this case comes before the court.
Would these justices be required to recuse themselves? If they vote that Barry is ineligible, haven’t they just voted to remove themselves from the bench? If Barry is ineligible, then surely any nominations by him, for any position, are also invalid?
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:22 AM
I noticed that this Sunday when I was at the grocery store with my wife. It is a little better than right after the election though. Instead of Obama being on all the covers he is only on 1/4 of them.
txaggie on March 2, 2009 at 9:22 AM
Can we abort B. Hussein Obama-Mugabe’s unwanted presidency?
It’s still in its first trimester and it has all the signs of being retarded.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Obama: forcing Americans to kill babies and protect terrorists.
This guy’s career is over in 2012.
jencab on March 2, 2009 at 9:26 AM
What absolute nonsense! Let me remind you what the free market means. In the free market, a pharmacist’s employer should be allowed to fire the pharmacist if he won’t do his job like dispensing contraception and the morning-after pill. Pharmacists with such fetishes should only get to work with the pharmacies that are willing to hire them.
I do entirely agree with Ed’s conclusion that we should let the market sort it out.
thuja on March 2, 2009 at 9:26 AM
From what I had heard, the drain has already begun. A lot of doctors who were nearing retirement age, have decided that the hassle just isn’t worth it anymore.
Of course that was before the economy, and the stock market went into the crapper.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:27 AM
It seems to me this is the way to create a crisis in healthcare. Catholic hospitals threaten to close, Obama confiscates them “for the children” and Presto! National Health Care!
efemdy on March 2, 2009 at 9:29 AM
It’s awful hard to perform any medical procedure, if the hospital will not let it’s facilities be used for that procedure.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:29 AM
It would never happen. The Supreme Court has already thrown out a few cases challenging the presidency of Obama. We can complain all we want, but to quote Obama “I Won”. If we are speaking in hypotheticals, than it would go to Pelosi. Using the rules of succession it would go from Obama, to Biden, to Pelosi. If the Obama-Biden ticket are ruled ineligible than Pelosi is the first person who was elected by a legal election.
txaggie on March 2, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Mark the great: Like I said, we are in a terrible bind. I would sudpect that the Cheif Justice would throw out the usurpers picks. He has little choice in the matter.
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:30 AM
I wish that didn’t make so much sense.
txaggie on March 2, 2009 at 9:30 AM
txaggie on March 2, 2009 at 9:29 AM
If Barry was never legally elected, then the rules of succession would not apply.
I have commented numerous times regarding the lack of merit in the claims that Barry was not legally elected. I was just commenting on who would be president if such a thing were to happen.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Hey Obama Catholics, how’s that radical abortion thing working out for ya?
marklmail on March 2, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Great, can I fire B. Hussein Obama-Mugabe then, since his entire body of work is a horrid abortion?
We have a stillborn stock market because of this quack.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Txaggie: You are incorrect. The ticket is invalid therefore McAmnesty gets the nod as he has fulfilled the requirements and he has the most electoral votes after the usurper.
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Patients who don’t like doctors who won’t discuss abortion or prescribe contraception can see another doctor; they can also find another pharmacist if the neighborhood pharmacy won’t fill a prescription for the Pill. The free market works out those issues on its own without government sticking its nose into it and forcing providers to violate their religious tenets to stay in business.
It would be immoral to force a doctor to perform abortions, and if a doctor refused to provide abortions, a potential patient has the right to know that in advance and choose accordingly. However, I don’t see how one can be a pharmacist yet refuse to hand out birth control. Would that same pharmacist refuse to work in a store that sold condoms?
A Catholic who doesn’t believe in birth control won’t use it in their own life, but does that mean that you are religiously obligated to force others to follow your religious beliefs? Don’t, say, Muslim taxi-cab drivers try to do that when they refuse to pick up passengers who are carrying alcohol? Would you argue that the passenger could simply use the free market and patronize a different taxi driver?
If a state had the death penalty, would a staunch Catholic refuse to work in any capacity for that state?
Buy Danish on March 2, 2009 at 9:33 AM
i never quite understood the need for this rule in the first place. if you’re a pharmacist, who are you to judge someone using the morning after pill?
doctors still arent being forced to perform abortions, which would be way out of line anyway…but the morning after pill or even birth control arent abortions…refusing someone the pill (which is also prescribed to regulate periods, rather than for sexual reasons) just doesnt seem to make sense…
ernesto on March 2, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Unless B. Hussein Obama-Mugabe plans to reintroduce slavery, good luck getting providers to work for $.50 per day.
But then, since the Democrat’s hero and role model is President for life Mugabe in Zimbabwe, let’s not put it past them.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Ed,
Brilliant analysis as usual, and spot on. However you make the mistake of actually believing those people mean what they say. It has already expired.
rightside on March 2, 2009 at 9:33 AM
The Acting President thinks it’s important to keep up the act.
tarpon on March 2, 2009 at 9:34 AM
I’m fairly sure the Obama Catholics are of the cafeteria variety. Their conscience are clear.
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:34 AM
Of acting like an incompetent, hopelessly corrupt jackass?
B. Hussein Obama-Mugabe is hereby awarded the Oscar for Best Performance by a complete failure.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Just fine, thank you. We are only drive-by cafeteria catholics anyways.
/sarc
OmahaConservative on March 2, 2009 at 9:35 AM
I believe it was Netherlands, when doctors objected to their nationalization health care, briefly tried to forcibly draft all doctors into it’s armed forces, so that the state could order then to continue providing services.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:36 AM
Obummer will push his Marxist agenda until his last breath. America be damned.
bloviator on March 2, 2009 at 9:36 AM
I swear…this man’s middle name is DESTRUCTION!
This is disgusting!!
katy on March 2, 2009 at 9:36 AM
No corporate $$$ to extort there…Move along…
DamnYankee on March 2, 2009 at 9:37 AM
I assumed Planned Parenthood would have been too busy suspending employees for enabling child rape to notice.
BKennedy on March 2, 2009 at 9:38 AM
There isn’t an efficient free market in health care. Many people are limited in their choice of doctor, either by geography or insurance provider. Few people are knowledgeable enough to listen to a doctor and ask him about treatment he isn’t discussing.
The government aside, a doctor should have a professional obligation to let a patient know what contraception is available and how to seek it, even if that doctor’s personal beliefs are opposed to it.
dedalus on March 2, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Yes, please.
unwashed minion on March 2, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Big steps, little steps…it doesn’t matter. They all are part of the process of moving the infanticide meatwagon forward.
whitetop on March 2, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Is it any wonder why some call this guy the anti-Christ?
larvcom on March 2, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Man, that would be a mess.
If the SC ruled that all of Barry’s picks were illegitimate, then the new president (McCain) would come into a govt that has had the head of all of it’s depts removed. Normally, the previous president’s picks stay in office until their replacements are confirmed.
Possibly worse, if the SC decided to let Barry’s picks stay until they are replaced, then a heavily Democratic senate refuses to confirm any of McCain’s picks.
Yuck, what a mess.
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:41 AM
And yet we let them sit on juries in malpractice cases…
myrenovations on March 2, 2009 at 9:41 AM
marklmail on March 2, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Doug Kmiec needs to be publicly humiliated.
PimFortuynsGhost on March 2, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Nonsense – what if in the physician’s professional opinion, contraception is inherently unsafe, as the “morning after” pill clearly is?
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:42 AM
We should call him the Abortionist In Chief. He is so radically pro-abortion that he must force pro-life health care workers to violate their conscience. His praise of China seems to be from a philosophical agreement. How long before we have forced abortions in America?
Blue Collar Todd on March 2, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Do people even read Ed’s full posts. No one is going to be “forced” to perform an abortion who isn’t already “forced” to. I have a lot less sympathy when it comes to medical practitioners who are unwilling to distribute birth control, or even recommend birth control to patients who want to engage in sex, but are not prepared to have a baby. Especially when it comes to a young person. Is it the job of a doctor to regulate the lives of their patients and use their responsibility as distributors of methods of contraception to tell people when they’re “ready” to have sex or not. There’s something supremely creepy about that. It, along with the people who howled in outrage at a study demonstrating the effectiveness of planned parenthood in limiting abortions by limiting unwanted pregnancies suggest that much of the pro-life crowd cares more about controlling other people’s sex lives than they do about stopping abortion. Being anti-abortion is one thing, but being anti-contraception? Whatever…
DeathToMediaHacks on March 2, 2009 at 9:44 AM
And all of this directly relates to putting Governor Abortion (Sebeilus) at the head of HHS. I almost believe that Obama was not sad to see Daschle go.
myrenovations on March 2, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Yeah, juries are scary. If I got taken to the ER only to find that my treatment was being decided by 12 people with no qualifications, selected by the government and vetted by lawyers I’d try to get out of there quick.
dedalus on March 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM
And emergency contraception? It’s no problem if a girl wants the morning after pill and her neighborhood pharmacy refuses to give it to her?
You may disagree with a rule forcing the pharmacist to act in this situation, but don’t use the free market argument.
Snarky, but ridiculous. The administration isn’t allowed to do two things at the same time? A multitasking president is bad?
Great points.
tneloms on March 2, 2009 at 9:46 AM
So now we have a “no conscience rule”. Obama is going where he promised here — taking away every barrier to abortion, including those of conscience by medical professionals.
And there’s this:
The problem which Bush’s belated order sought to solve still exists, and will now be fought in the courtroom. Those pro-life people who voted for Obama didn’t understand the place the courtroom would play in all this, and now they will have that lesson seared into their memories — as will the rest of us.
unclesmrgol on March 2, 2009 at 9:47 AM
If this ruling were retroactive, Obama wouldn’t be here.
Chump In Chief.
profitsbeard on March 2, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Are you trying to claim that few people know about abortion?
MarkTheGreat on March 2, 2009 at 9:49 AM
But you make a different point than mine. There is a big difference if it is professional opinion or personal belief. I was referring to the latter. Certainly, the two aren’t guaranteed to be the same.
In either case the doctor should give the patient information that they may not have, along with risks involved. If there are treatments that the doctor won’t perform he should let the patient know where those are available.
dedalus on March 2, 2009 at 9:50 AM
What I boldfaced is perhaps one of the stupidest things I’ve ever seen written. In this day and age, the expressions “second opinion” and “alternative treatment” are virtually ingrained in every adult American. And that’s just in discussing the anatomical features that men and women share. As a man, if my doctor is talking about doing something extraordinary with my thangy and my plumbing, you damn well better believe I’ll be asking about alternatives. And I expect any adult woman to do likewise with regard to her thangy and her plumbing. If the subject is a minor, then the issue is resolved by having a parent help her through the discussion.
Go get governmental babysitters for other tasks. I want government out of bedrooms and out of doctors’ offices.
BuckeyeSam on March 2, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Everyone BUT Muslims.
bloggless on March 2, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Not the same – supporting the death penalty is not a mortal sin in the Catholic Church.
katiejane on March 2, 2009 at 9:52 AM
Read my comment above. There are many classes of medical professionals not covered by conscience laws — in fact, many are covered (like the pharmacist in Illinois) by an anti-conscience law.
I had a conversation with a person in my office, and his position is that if a doctor, pharmacist, or nurse is the only one in town, and a woman needs an abortion, the doctor, pharmacist, or nurse is obligated to provide their services in the effort because to not do so would be a violation of the woman’s civil rights. Well, DeathToMediaHacks, what do you think about that position? Isn’t that where Obama wants to go with FOCA?
unclesmrgol on March 2, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Here’s a patient who followed all of the advice given by one of Dr. B. Hussein Obama-Mugabe’s pharmacists:
Sounds very safe:
Only a quack would prescribe this pill in the first place and only another quack would fill it.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Atlas Shrugged……………it’s coming……..
Cinday Blackburn on March 2, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Unfortunately, I think that would play right into their hands. Last week, Obama slashed funding for private HMO’s that provide Medicaire services in a continued attempt to wrest control of any part of the health care sector that’s in private hands.
If Catholic hospitals close up shop, it’s only that much sooner that all health services become gov’t provided. I assure you that is exactly what they want!
The better thing to do would be civil disobedience. Drag the gov’t into court and have this drama played out in the media. I’m sure the hospitals can make this a referendum on abortion–which it is, and not on health care.
JiangxiDad on March 2, 2009 at 9:56 AM
I think that supporting the death penalty is a mortal sin, given the above. Note the italicized text. In the modern US penal system, that text is always operative, whereas the preceding text (beginning “presupposing”) has been shown to be fallacious in a large number of cases.
unclesmrgol on March 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM
I was referring to contraception. Yeah, some people are not very informed. Many people with a variety of conditions don’t do the work to get multiple opinions or challenge what their doctor’s tell them.
Most of the time the bad advice a patient gets is due to a doctor recommending a procedure he specializes in, rather than a cheaper one. For some patients, the free market works against them.
dedalus on March 2, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Yes and that’s this incompetent administration’s “plan”.
Cut reimbursement to the point where physicians/nurses will leave the profession in droves and new providers will not enter medicine.
Why go to medical school and go through the rigors of an internship and a residency, so you can make $75K a year under the Democrat’s dimwitted health care scheme?
No problem though, we can become like the UK and allow poorly educated Indonesians that we can’t understand, provide the care.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 10:01 AM
This is to be expected…Obama has no conscience.
coldwarrior on March 2, 2009 at 10:01 AM
I think I might actually prefer that P.BO spend all his time on this issue so that he doesn’t have have it free to brutalize our economy.
On the other hand, Congress might go ahead and do it for him while he’s busy.
Count to 10 on March 2, 2009 at 10:02 AM
What law are you citing? The prospect of President Pelosi is understandably terrifying, but I have no idea how we could stop it.
txaggie on March 2, 2009 at 10:03 AM
No, but I (a staunch Catholic who opposes the death penalty) would be required by my conscience to not participate in any activity leading to death, including serving on a jury which would impose the death penalty as punishment.
Some Catholics (myself not included) would even lie during the jury selection process to assure that the death penalty was not carried out.
When serving Caesar conflicts with serving God, God must always win.
unclesmrgol on March 2, 2009 at 10:03 AM
You mean trophy wife/event planner Pelosi and Gaming Commission Chairman/Gambino Errand Boy Reid just might not have the solution to stimulating our economy?
Wow, couldn’t have seen that coming.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 10:05 AM
It is crystal clear. But, of course, so were the stakes in the election, yet it meant nothing.
You know there’s a fight coming, maybe physical, certainly knock-down, drag out. We’ll never be the same again. Take some pictures of the end of an era, sear some things into your memory, and good luck to you!
JiangxiDad on March 2, 2009 at 10:05 AM
Of course. What else distinguishes one as human?
JiangxiDad on March 2, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Well, at least we’ll all have access to universally crappy care.
But we can rest well at night knowing that our Democrat politicians will have the best care available, because they’ll have a system set up just for them.
NoDonkey on March 2, 2009 at 10:07 AM
This scenario would be French Revolution redux.
DrStock on March 2, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Then you haven’t met the people I’ve met, or read much of what I’ve read.
You are imagining a world of people who are able to shop for doctors the way they might buy a product on eBay or Amazon. The medical industry is not a friction-free market–geography, insurance, medical knowledge, and time constraints all can restrict the quality of medical care someone receives.
dedalus on March 2, 2009 at 10:08 AM
PARTIAL LIST OF DOCUMENTS THAT BARACK OBAMA REFUSES TO RELEASE -. OBAMA’S SECRECY AND “CLOSED RECORDS” POLICY
Indonesian Passport – Not released
Application for U.S. Citizenship (as former citizen of Indonesia) – Not released
Immigration Records – Not released
Original Vault Copy Birth Certificate – Not released
Certificate of Live Birth – Counterfeit Version on Obama Web Site
Obama / Dunham Marriage License – Not released
Soetoro / Dunham Marriage License – Not released
Soetoro Adoption Records – Not Released
Fransiskus Assisi School Application – Not released
Punahou School Records – Not released
Selective Service Registration – Counterfeit version generated
Occidental College records – Not released
Columbia College Records – Not released
Columbia Thesis – Not released
Harvard College Records – Not released
Baptism Certificate – None
Medical Records – Not released
Illinois State Senate Records – Not released
Law Practice Client List – Not released
University of Chicago Scholarly Articles – None
searcher484 on March 2, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Not if the doctor considers the procedure requested by the patient to be immoral. The doctor is then under the compulsion to state so to the patient, and nothing more which would go counter to the doctor’s (or nurse’s, or pharmacist’s) conscience.
Your position is just another way of saying what my office-mate said — that a medical professional can be civally obligated to perform an act with which they disagree.
Where the civil rights of patient and doctor collide, I think the doctor’s rights always win.
unclesmrgol on March 2, 2009 at 10:09 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »