Category: Religious Freedom

Colombia’s bishops seek conscience protection in wake of euthanasia directives

Communicado de la Comisión Permanente de la Conferencia Episcopal de Colombia

Statement of the Permanent Committee of the Episcopal Conference of Colombia

(Extract)

 . . . La Iglesia Católica quiere ahora reiterar, a través de la voz de sus pastores, su firme desaprobación a este grave extravío ético y moral. Consideramos gravísimo que derechos fundamentales, como el derecho a la vida, a la libertad de conciencia o a la libertad religiosa, consagrados en nuestra Carta Magna, sean injustamente restringidos por organismos que deberían ser garantes de la Constitución y de los derechos de los colombianos. . . . The Catholic Church now wants to reiterate, through the voice of its pastors, its firm disapproval of this serious ethical and moral loss. We consider it very serious that fundamental rights, such as the right to life, freedom of conscience or religious freedom, enshrined in our Constitution, are unjustly restricted by organizations that should be guarantors of the Constitution and of the rights of Colombians.
Como Iglesia Católica, siempre respetuosa del ordenamiento jurídico como base fundamental de la sociedad, solicitamos al Gobierno que, en los diversos campos sociales, entre ellos el de la salud, garantice a nuestras instituciones el poder desarrollar su labor en pleno acatamiento de sus propios valores e ideales. . . As a Catholic Church, always respectful of the legal system as the fundamental basis of society, we ask the Government, in the various social fields, including health, to guarantee our institutions to develop their work in full compliance with their own values and ideals. . .

[Full text]

After Hobby Lobby: What Is Caesar’s, What Is God’s?

Address at the pre-conference session, ‘After Hobby Lobby: What Is Caesar’s, What Is God’s?’

2015 Petrie-Flom Center Annual Conference
“Law, Religion, and Health in America,”
Harvard Law School

  Frank R. Wolf, *

. . . As we ponder, “What Is Caesar’s, What Is God’s?”, I am reminded of a profound quote from one of Virginia’s native sons.

Founding Father James Madison once opined, “Conscience is the most sacred of all property.” And as it relates to our discussion today, I maintain that conscience is most assuredly God’s.

In that vein, I’d like to begin with a personal story which serves as a window into my own conscience.

On the opening day of a new Congress, the vote for Speaker is the first vote held, and it is always by voice vote. Each Member’s name is called out, and he or she shouts out the name of their party leader.

On January 7, 1997 – the opening day of the 105th Congress – we were voting on the reelection of Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House.

Newt was then under investigation by the House Ethics Committee. The House Democratic whip, David Bonior, had filed most of the eighty-four ethics charges against him, which ranged from accusations that Newt had misused tax-exempt funds to criticism over a lucrative advance he was offered by HarperCollins to write two books.

Eighty-three of the eighty-four charges were ultimately dropped.

However at the time of the vote, the Ethics Committee report had not yet been published.

I felt that I could not, in good conscience, vote for Newt as Speaker until I had seen the report. This turned out to be a very controversial decision.  [Full text]

Conscience and Community: Understanding the Freedom of Religion

Responding to Protections and Applications of the First Amendment Today

Georgetown University,
Berkley Center for Religion, Peace and World Affairs
Cornerstone
Reproduced with permission

Richard Garnett*

“Religion,” said Justice William Douglas in his Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) opinion, is “an individual experience.” The opinion was a partial dissent, and this statement is partially correct. But, it does not tell the entire story.  Many “religious experiences” are those of monks, mystics, and prophets – and of salesmen, coaches, teachers, and cops. But, many are also of peoples and tribes and congregations. As Justice Douglas’s colleague, Justice William Brennan, insisted in Corporation of the Presiding Bishop v. Amos (1987), “[f]or many individuals, religious activity derives meaning in large measure from participation in a larger religious community. Such a community represents an ongoing tradition of shared beliefs, an organic entity not reducible to a mere aggregation of individuals.” [Full Text]

Agreement reached on conscience rights

Catholic Conference of Illinois

Last month, we posted about an attack on the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act in the form of Senate Bill 1564.

The Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act allows medical personnel and health care facilites to avoid participating in medical procedures — such as abortion, sterilization, and certain end-of-life care — that violate their beliefs and values.

The original form of Senate Bill 1564 easily passed a Democratic-led Senate committee on a 7-3 vote.

The Catholic Conference of Illinois and the Illinois Catholic Health Association worked to modify this bill to protect the conscience protections of doctors, hospitals, and health care facilities. The original  form of Senate Bill 1564 mandated referrals and had a section stating that if there is a delay in the provision of health care there is no conscience right. We could not allow that to happen, especially since the sponsor of the legislation had the votes to pass SB 1564 in its original form after it had passed committee.

We reached an agreement with the bill’s sponsor that reflects the current medical practices in Catholic hospitals. Catholic health care ethicists and Catholic hospital lawyers participated in the negotiations.

We are now taking a neutral stance regarding Senate Bill 1564. A neutral stance means that we neither support nor oppose the bill.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE AMENDED SB 1564 REQUIRES NO ONE TO TELL PEOPLE WHERE ABORTIONS CAN BE OBTAINED.

Ontario physicians seek court protection from CPSO policy

For immediate release

Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada

TORONTO – Dr. Diane Haak, President of the Christian Medical and Dental Society (CMDS), Woodstock emergency room physician Dr. Michelle Korvemaker, and CMDS executive director Larry Worthen announced, today, that they have filed documents asking the Court to declare that a new College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) policy infringes upon Ontario doctors’ freedom of conscience.

“My conscience and religious beliefs do not allow me to engage in procedures to which I have a moral, ethical or religious objection. I, and all physicians in Ontario, have the right to practice medicine according to my conscience and free from state compulsion,” said Dr. Korvemaker.

Dr. Haak added, “This policy may force physicians who do not feel they can refer or perform procedures that go against their conscience to leave the practice of medicine.”

CMDS filed an application for declaratory relief asking the court to declare that portions of the CPSO’s March 6, 2015, policy breach sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Said Larry Worthen, ”We firmly believe that it is possible to ensure access to  controversial procedures and pharmaceuticals in Ontario without trampling upon the constitutional rights of physicians”

The CPSO policy violates freedoms of conscience and religion by requiring physicians and surgeons to make formal referrals when their consciences don’t permit their performing a procedure or treatment. The policy also violates Charter freedoms by requiring them to perform procedures when certain circumstances arise.

 CMDS Canada represents some 1600 physicians and dentists across Canada (http://www.cmdscanada.org). The Canadian Federation of Catholic Physician’s Societies is also supporting the application.

-30-

For more information, please contact:      Larry Worthen  902-880-2495