Category: Commentary

People need to be free to act on their conscience

Irish Examiner

Dónal O’Mathúna

CONSCIENTIOUS objection is a hugely important concept. On fundamental ethical issues, like life and death, people should have the freedom to act on their conscience.

This applies to those legislating on abortion and providing access to abortion. The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Bill 2013 allows conscientious objection, but in the most limited way. Its provisions are more restrictive than in many other jurisdictions, which carries a chilling message. . .

. . . Forcing people to violate their conscience risks bending or breaking the moral compass that guides them. Therefore, legislators should be free to vote on this legislation according to their conscience. And anyone working in hospitals providing abortions should be able to consciously object to being involved. [Full text]

Should medical staff be able to opt out on grounds of conscience?

scotlandtonight
Click on the image to watch the discussion.

Scotland Tonight looked at the issue of conscientious objection by health care workers following the successful appeal of midwives against an order to delegate, supervise, or support staff involved in providing abortions.

Discussion participants were Paul Tully of the pro-life group, Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, health journalist Pennie Taylor and employment lawyer Donald MacKinnon.

Rights of conscience must be preserved

Lawmakers offer bill to protect health care workers from being forced to violate  their moral and religious beliefs

Editorial
The Detroit News

Michigan lawmakers worried that the Obama administration is brushing over  concerns that its health care law will trample religious freedoms have crafted  an appropriate bill to shield workers and hospitals from being coerced into  violating their conscience.

Sen. John Moolenaar, R-Midland, introduced legislation that would offer  conscience protections to individuals and institutions in the health care  field. . . [Read more]

Conscience vs. Religion

Peter Lawler

So Richard Reinsch has a good article on the limits of James Madison’s religious thought–as expressed in the overrated MEMORIAL AND REMONSTRANCE.  There the duty each of us has to our Creator is private or merely “conscientious.”  It’s a limit to government, to be sure.  But it’s a personal–or not social–limit.  It’s far from clear that Madison is saying that government is limited by the freedom the church as an organized body of thought and action. . . [Read more]

Protect rights for health workers

Rebecca Mastee

A recent viewpoint column regarding Michigan Senate Bill 136, the Religious Liberty and Conscience Protection Act, proved a disservice to the LSJ and its readers. The column was factually inaccurate and relied on scare tactics by highlighting a case in Ireland which, of course, has different laws than the United States. Let’s set the record straight about SB 136.

The purpose of the bill is to maintain civil liberties and conscience rights that our nation has cherished for over 200 years. Unfortunately, these constitutional rights are slowly eroding as government mandates are forcing individuals and institutions to act contrary to their religious teachings. . . . [Read more]