Saturday, December 27, 2014

Freedom of not having a choice

Forcing someone to perform an abortion when she morally opposes it is tantamount to making a conscientious objector enter combat

Freedom of not having a choice

0 comments
Blog Image
UMDNJ

We’ve been talking a lot about cover-ups lately, from the administration’s blatant lies about Operation Fast and Furious to the sordid affair taking place at Penn State.

Now, across the bridge, another type of cover-up is taking place, only this time it doesn’t involve guns or sexual abuse.  It involves religious freedom.

The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey performs abortions.  Since they’re legal (even though a growing number of Americans, particularly people under the age of 30, think the procedures are simply legalized murder) there’s not much any of us can do to prevent them from terminating pregnancies.

However, as an organization which is funded by the government and operating within the United States, it is bound by the First Amendment.  That document guarantees religious freedom.

So you would think that someone who is employed by the hospital but who is opposed to abortion on religious grounds would be eligible for a conscience waiver, right?

Not so fast.  The UMDNJ does not believe that nurses who refuse to participate in the dismemberment of fetuses in any way, shape or form (including prepping the patient for the procedure) should be able to opt-out.  They’ve been refusing to honor the religious concerns of their employees as required under federal law 42 U.S.C. 300a-7(c)(2)) which explicitly gives the nurses the right to opt out of assisting in abortions.

So twelve of  those nurses decided to file suit.  You think that would make the UMDNJ rethink its policy?

Nah.  They just lie about it.  Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, the hospital ordered two of the plaintiff nurses to ‘assist’ at abortions.  When they objected, the women received a command to ‘assist’ patients with pre- or post- operative care.  In other words, they were supposed to get the women ready to have an abortion, or make sure that they had successfully recuperated from the procedure, even though they didn’t have to actually take part in killing a child or, to be more specific ‘destroying a fetus.’

In other words, they just had to grease the wheels for the actual abortionists.  In fact, this is exactly how the hospital framed the issue:

No nurse is compelled to have direct involvement in, and/or attendance in the room at the time of, a procedure to which she or he objects based on his/her cultural values, ethics and/or religious beliefs. (emphasis supplied)

The hospital is playing word games, as noted by the nurses’ attorney, Matt Bowman:

But once the media began asking UMDNJ about their illegal behavior, they lied to cover it up. As of the time of this writing, UMDNJ still will not tell ADF attorneys if it has backed off from its Nov. 2 directive requiring nurses to assist. Yet UMDNJ continues to tell the media that no nurse is so require.

It’s one thing to perform abortions.  It is quite another to force people to engage in activity that goes against their religious beliefs, particularly where this violates both the Constitution and federal statute.

I find all of this fascinating.  The people who support the so-called ‘choice’ of a woman to terminate her pregnancy are not willing to give that same, legally-protected ‘choice’ to others who disagree with them on moral or religious grounds.

Sounds more like a Hobson’s choice, to me.

0 comments
 
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog
See Christine Flowers on Channel 6's "Inside Story" Sunday at 11:30 a.m.

Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.

Christine M. Flowers Daily News Columnist
Also on Philly.com
Stay Connected