Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wagglebee
What about this, if a private hospital required it's staff physicians to perform abortions, something that they had never done before, would you support them?

If that was a requirement for a private hospital, yes I would. I would disagree with it, I wouldn't go to that hospital but I respect private property and the right of the owner of that private property to operate their business (as long as it's not illegal) as they see fit.

I'm not saying that what Target did was necessarily illegal, I'm saying it was wrong. And I'm saying that for that reason, pro-life consumers should hold them responsible

And in a free market, that is a fully acceptable practice. However this woman does not have a court case

199 posted on 01/27/2006 9:18:59 PM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies ]


To: billbears
She should have a court case.

No physician should be required to perform an abortion, and no pharmacist should be required to dispense abortificents. If enough refused on professional, ethical, and moral grounds, Roe v. Wade would largely be a dead letter even if SCOTUS never overturned it.

At a minimum, abortion--even if legal--should not be easy to get. There should be moral, ethical, and professional hurdles in the way.

201 posted on 01/27/2006 9:26:03 PM PST by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson