Posted on 08/26/2022 1:51:04 PM PDT by karpov
The Little Sisters of the Poor were a cause célèbre during President Obama’s tenure, and they’re still in court defending religious exceptions to ObamaCare’s contraceptive mandate. Progressives don’t merely want to win the country’s culture wars. They want to impose a Carthaginian peace.
The latest evidence is a case involving the Franciscan Alliance that was heard a few weeks ago by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The alliance is a Catholic hospital system, mostly in Indiana, founded by the Sisters of St. Francis of Perpetual Adoration. As the alliance argues in its brief, in 2016 the government interpreted ObamaCare’s nondiscrimination provisions “to require doctors and hospitals nationwide to perform and insure gender-transition procedures and abortions or else be liable for ‘sex’ discrimination.”
Specifically, the feds read the law to require that services be offered on an equal basis. “If a gynecologist performs a hysterectomy for a woman with uterine cancer,” the alliance’s brief says, “she must do the same for a woman who wants to remove a healthy uterus to live as a man.”
The alliance could not comply as a matter of conscience and medical judgment. Neither could members of the Christian Medical and Dental Associations. They sued, citing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and with help from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which also represented the Little Sisters.
A district court ruled in their favor. After an initial trip to the Fifth Circuit, they also won a permanent injunction. Yet instead of taking the loss, the Biden Administration is now appealing. The government argues that the alliance faces a merely “hypothetical” threat of enforcement, and it argues that RFRA claims must be evaluated case by case. But if religious doctors can’t raise a RFRA shield pre-emptively, they’ll practice under a constant government threat.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Thanks for full article, from cheap me.
If a patient told a doctor that he or she wanted an arm removed, because he gets a sexual thrill from becoming an amputee, is the doctor justified in refusing to operate?
How is this different?
Mentally ill freaks versus sane doctors.
This is what you get when you have authoritarian government that is motivated by lunatic creeds.
I go to Franciscan medical facilities. They have signs that say they operate according to Catholic moral and social teachings. There are crucifixes in the examination rooms. In the hospital, they pray the Angelus over the PA system.
God preserve them.
"In a separate action, the HHS civil rights office July 25 released proposed regulations that could force health care workers to perform gender transition procedures; require health insurance plans to cover those costs; and likely remove federal conscience protection for those in health care who object to performing abortions."
These regulations should be taken as cert to SCOTUS, and when they say it's not ripe, take it back to them every freaking week and raise hell. Why isn't there one conservative capable of inviting Becerra on a show unaware and just carving him up over this?
Why would someone seeking an operation...someone to cut into their flesh, want to have it done by someone who doesn’t want to do that operation? Same thing for baking a cake for a big event. Or taking photos of a big event. This idea that you can force someone to serve you and your needs even though they don’t want to is ridiculous...dangerous.
The other day I was listening to a septic tank cleaner tell a woman who was rude that, “thank you for the call, but you are rude, and I don’t want to do the job. There are plenty of others on the list, please call one of them.” That was almost the entire conversation. What if she said, “No, you’ll do it, or I’ll ruin you in court?”
It’s also what you get when you have medical facilities that can’t stay in business without Caesar’s money.
It’s the Golden Rule: he who has the gold makes the rules, which facilitates the authoritarianism, and not just in the medical field.
I am fine if the hospital is required to perform a hysterectomy on a man with uterine cancer.
They should also have to do orchidectomy for women with cancerous testes.
Physically impossible except in a few extreme cases of genetic oddities.
XX vs. XY matters, especially so in medical issues. That is the real science.
What is being demanded is that we play along with and pander to severe mental illness. This is not a good thing for a variety of reasons.
I forgot the /sarc tag. Sorry.
Point being, that while the hospital is required to treat cancer, it should not be required to remove healthy organs.
Or do vasectomies or tubal ligation, or IVF, or elective abortion, how have they not been required to do whatever the patient wants?
Agreed.
I'm smarter now (I think).
Also see my tagline.
Doctor, I want you to remove my left wrist and hand and sew an ankle and foot on instead.
NURSE!! Call the psycho ward - STAT!!
Doctor, I want you to remove my penis and make me look like I was born with a vagina.
NURSE!! Set this man up an appointment for next Thursday.
Once more; I shudda read ahead.
I’d used the truck that has the intermittently faulty shutoff valve...
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.