President Obama plans to rescind the conscience clause which protects medical professionals and organizations (such as hospitals) to choose not to provide services which are contrary to their religious beliefs or missions. This specifically pertains to the performance of abortions and sterilizations.

I’ve blogged about the effects of this before since it was part of the Freedom of Choice Act that President Obama promised to deliver.  This is a bad decision that will negatively impact the health care system.  You have the opportunity to express your thoughts about this clause, but that ends on April 9.  Here are ways you can express your opposition to the rescission:

  • Through their webform (select the leave a comment link).
  • Call them at (202) 456-1111 (comments) or (202) 456-1414 (switchboard).

Some points that you can make:

  • This clause has been in effect for 30 years and has not in any way diminished a person’s ability to obtain abortion or sterilizations.
  • This violates a medical professional and organization’s right to conscience, as well as, the medical professional’s constitutional rights to freedom of religion.  They should not, because of federal funding, be forced to check their values and consciences at the door.
  • This will negatively impact the health care system due to the potential (and likelihood) of Catholic and other faith-based organizations (hospitals) who depend on federal funding closing their doors rather than perform abortions.
  • Medical professional’s could be fired from organizations that provide abortions by refusing to participate as well.

Please let the Department of Health and Human Services know that you oppose this decision.

HT: Lisa Graas

13 comments
  1. Thanks for bringing this issue up. It could really cause so many problems. I appreciate the Catholic Hospitals, and their strong pro-life stand. When I lost a baby at 14 weeks, and had to deliver the baby at a Catholic Hospital, they actually paid for the burial of my baby.

    But if this goes through, it could be the end of Catholic Hospitals.

  2. Is Obama's goal here to call the Pope's bluff?! He can't honestly believe that Catholic hospitals (among others) will acquiesce to this?

  3. I don't know what he's thinking, but he should seriously look at what the Diocese of Boston did when they were told they had to adopt to gay couples… they shut down.

    They won't do it. Good for them!

  4. Wow-this is what was truly meant by “Separation of Church and State.” How can the President even THINK he has the right to infringe upon the convictions religious hospitals? What a sad time in American history…

  5. Thanks for bringing this issue up. It could really cause so many problems. I appreciate the Catholic Hospitals, and their strong pro-life stand. When I lost a baby at 14 weeks, and had to deliver the baby at a Catholic Hospital, they actually paid for the burial of my baby. Catholic Hospitals really do so much, unfortunately even more so than some of the so called protestant hospitals.

    But if this goes through, it could be the end of any religious hospital that stands up for something.

  6. Truly, I find this sad. I cannot believe that you only see abortion as the main issue of this so-called “rule of conscience.” But then again maybe that is all you care about. Not once do I see you any of you taking this seriously. For example, this rule is so over-reaching that it could easily apply to you because you are homosexual (I believe in my moral superiority that, anyone who has HIV or AIDS should suffer all the pain and discomfort because of their actions, so I will not tell the patient about their options or even administer the painkillers to help, and as I feel so strongly I will pressure my nurses, the cooks, and the janitors to not even provide a minimum of services for this person- such as clean sheets, food, water, etc. Who could stop me?) It could apply to you because you are a cancer patient, an alcoholic, a drug user, an illegal immigrant, or one of many things because obviously these people have made decisions that negatively affected their lives and I find this unconscionable and against my supercilious code of ethics. Plus, these might be the more expensive people to treat. Hmmm.

  7. Not even the same thing man. Why don't you “think a bit?” You are comparing killing an innocent life with refusing to treat patients.

    If this is a problem, revise the clause, not rescind it.

    This is a straw man argument.

Comments are closed.

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

It’s Time for John Boehner to Go

John Boehner has been a failure at providing leadership for the House Republicans, he’s given far too much in negotiations, and it’s time for him to go.

Sarah Palin: Defending the Fight to Cast off a Conservative’s “Shackles”

By Sarah Palin Does anyone seriously believe that Dr. Laura Schlessinger is…

Stimulusol XR – Helping You Cope

In order to help citizens cope with the coming Obama Depression due…

United Nations Treaty Threatens Families, Senate Vote Imminent

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a vote on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities treaty this week.