Posted on 11/07/2019 2:26:28 PM PST by bkopto
A federal judge in New York on Wednesday struck down a new Trump administration rule that would have allowed health care clinicians to refuse to provide abortions for moral or religious reasons.
U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York rejected the federal rule after women's groups, health organizations and multiple states sued the Department of Health and Human Services, arguing the exemptions were unconstitutional.
snip
"The refusal of care rule was an unlawful attempt to allow health care providers to openly discriminate and refuse to provide necessary health care to patients based on providers’ ‘religious beliefs or moral objections,’" New York Attorney General Letitia James, who led the lawsuit for the states, said. "We will continue to use every tool at our disposal to protect access to health care and protect the rights of all individuals.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Whose care? The murder-mother, the murder abortionist and his/her accomplices or the baby?
They will have to pay for all those murders...eventually.
Perhaps it is way past time to jettison “for life” appointment of federal judges.
In view of recent rulings re cakes & tee shirts, I don't see higher courts upholding that ruling -- especially since one of those courts added in the Constitutional prohibition of involuntary servitude as an argument!
Thou shalt not kill
Quite right!
From the article: "..arguing the exemptions were unconstitutional."
The court: "There are no exemptions from the state mandate that citizen medical professionals are to kill selected unborn babies."
Anything more sickening?
Don’t Dr.’s have to be certified and licensed to do certain procedures? If so, then don’t certify in that thing. Cardiologists are heart specialists, not board certified gynecologists. So the answer is relatively easy.
You WILL bake that cake. You WILL kill that baby.
Justice John “BB Balls” Roberts.
They teach those judges how to be Gods during their three years of law school.
First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
How, pray tell, does a statute, or a regulation implementing that statute, somehow have precedence over the First Amendment to the Constitution of The United States prohibiting the free exercise of religion? These medical practitioners are choosing of their own free will to exercise their conscious choice to practice their religion in their work and life. A statute and a regulation MUST NOT prevent that, by doing so, it establishes a prohibition against their free practice of their religion. Quod Erat Demonstrandum. This idiot ignorant Judge is completely and idiotically ignoring the primacy of the Constitution agreement from which all other laws derive their authority.
Murder of a baby described as “care”. God will judge this national abomination.
What I think will happen in the future is that radical nurse-practitioners will be certified to perform abortions without oversight from a physician. After all, abortions are the Left’s sacred sacrament and nothing will be allowed to stop it - not physicians, not parents, not spouses, not boyfriend, no-one.
Attorney General Letitia James, who led the lawsuit for the states, said.
“We will continue to use every tool at our disposal to protect access to health care and protect the rights of all individuals.”
Does she listen to herself?
All of this because we have religious freedom and can’t refuse service?
I don’t think you would want me working on your house or much of anything else if I didn’t want to. Just not a good idea.
The Hippocratic Oath doesn’t say that but implies it and the Oath was pretty much thrown out in the 80’s.
It was replaced by the Physicians Oath out of Geneva
Even that oath says “I will maintain the utmost respect for human life; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity;”
The pirate Roberts has no integrity, he will do as his masters order him do.
“The refusal of care rule was an unlawful attempt to allow health care providers to openly discriminate and refuse to provide necessary health care to patients based on providers’ ‘religious beliefs or moral objections,’”
key word is ‘necessary’ - it isn’t
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.