“in a new tab or window”
Found this inserted randomly 14 times in this article. Whew!
This is actually the reverse. The patient is claiming the right to discriminate against a doctor.
“had spoken to the woman on the grounds of anonymity.”
****************************
They just made up this story out of thin air.
“A healthcare provider must not be required to participate in or pay for a healthcare procedure, treatment, or service that violates the conscience of the healthcare provider.”
Seems reasonable. Not to the “bake the d@mn cake” crowd, of course.
I don’t remember any MedPage Today stories about the nurses who anonymously reported that they did not treat anyone who they knew was MAGA, or intentionally made injections and other procedures more painful for patients who they knew were MAGA. Those stories were in the conservative news during the last Trump term.
“”That provider told me that thanks to [the 2025 Medical Ethics Defense Actopens in a new tab or window], they were not comfortable treating me because I am an unwed mother and that goes against their Christian values.””
That is certainly not a Christian value. Hard to imagine Christ would have turned her away.
Hmmm. Why would she want such a doctor to be forced to treat her?
This article just screams “BS!” because the medical establishment is nearly unanimous on promoting prenatal care where and whenever possible to prevent problems and save lives.
And nothing prevents this woman from seeing another physician if the first one is denying her care.
Someone’s grinding an agenda here and Tennessee’s Senators are obviously targets.
If you are taking Gooobemrint money for payment of services, you do what the Goobermint tells you to do.
Don’t like it? Petition your Goobermint for change.
Private practice? No Goobermint money?
You run your business as you want to run it.
That’s right, it’s a BUSINESS.
Can’t have both.
I call BS on this Christians-are-discriminatory story. The left always tell you whom they fear the most.
How quaint. I thought the new breed of preachers have “discovered”, for the first time in thousands of years (aka Reverend Delman Coates), that the Bible says all consensual sex is good. As long as you don’t have to pay for it.
I was lazy and did not read but I am guessing the sum up would be “We must make doctors perform abortions or women will die!”
“That provider told me that thanks to [the 2025 Medical Ethics Defense Actopens in a new tab or window], they were not comfortable treating me because I am an unwed mother and that goes against their Christian values.” She revealed she must now cross state lines for basic prenatal care.
I am quite sure the above is a lie. No Christian provider would deny prenatal treatment because a woman was unwed.e . This is not the first time people have lied regarding laws on conscience protection. The goal is simple, force providers to perform abortions.
Something I do not understand. Why does she have to go out of state? Why not go to another doctor within the state? Is this doctor allegedly refusing to treat her that only prenatal doctor within her state?
A true Christian doctor would never refuse to care for a pregnant woman and her unborn child because she’s unwed.
Has this story been verified?
There are any number of rainbow haired doctors in the state flying the transgender flag, who would be happy to treat her.
So what? If a doctor discriminates against you, go see another.
Bkmk
The Demoncrat Party oof Slavery strikes again!