No? Doctors specialize and why force someone who is Christian to perform abortions? I don't know much about the medical profession but I assume not everyone does everything. Your comparison is ridiculous, as Christian couples need and have a strong desire to get married in a certain way (similar to everyone else) whereas someone getting an abortion does not specifically need a Christian doctor to do it.

No, and i doubt any court would order a doctor to perform an abortion. And it would be dangerous to try to force doctors to perform any procedure they do not feel comfortable with.

Infact, i'm pretty sure doctors have a professional code of ethics protecting them from such a risk.

I don't think the same risks exist when filing paperwork. Apart from being found i contempt of court. I believe she should simply be fired.

If a christian doctor was offered a position in an abortion clinic, and refused to perform their duties, then they should likewise be fired.

Doctors rarely take jobs where they are forced to do things against their beliefs.

Now should Catholic marriage license clerks refuse marriage licenses to divorced straight Catholics seeking to marry for a second time? After all unless their first marriage was annulled, they aren't allowed to remarry in the opinion of the Catholic church.

"why force someone who is Christian to perform abortions?"

I don't know, maybe for the same reason Catholic charities are forced to pay for health insurance for their employees that covers contraceptives? Maybe it's just too inconvenient to allow people to make moral decisions that conflict with settled public policy.

mute

It's not really the same thing Tolstoy. There are a large number of people who believe abortion is murder, and it's not just a religious view.

(Nobody needs to know when you mute a thread)

Why is this about 'Christian' doctors. Surely the question should be whether a doctor should be forced to perform an abortion if it was against their moral code. Or are you saying only people brought up and taught to be Christians can have an objection to abortions.

Role on the end of all religions and their self centred bigotry.

First of all, this is for hospitals no the government so the sub-text thing in the title should not matter here, and personally I say freedom of Religion wins this one out. Get another doctor

"Surely the question should be whether a doctor should be forced to perform an abortion if it was against their moral code. Or are you saying only people brought up and taught to be Christians can have an objection to abortions."

"Should doctors who have deep moral or spiritual convictions against abortions be forced to perform them or face prison time?" was too long to be accepted as a webdip thread title. Since I'm not a Christian myself, you're really barking up the wrong tree.

And besides, referencing non-Christians would have invited all manner of thread-derailing discussions about the minutiae of various religions' opinions of abortion that I didn't really want to be bothered with.

"Would you be OK with forcing someone to commit a murder?"

I wouldn't, but I suspect there is a segment of the population who believe it's not murder, and that those who disagree need to be punished and forced to accept and participate in the legally established pro-abortion standard of morality.

"There are a large number of people who believe abortion is murder, and it's not just a religious view."

There are also large numbers of people, not all of whom are religious, who believe gay marriage is an abomination that will result in (if not God's wrath) all manner of negative and apocalyptic social consequences. But they are being forced to support gay marriages by writing out gay marriage licenses and baking gay wedding cakes against their will under threat of punishment by the state.

While I personally could not care less about whether or not gays can marry, the legal punishments being meted out for those who have acted on their personal objections are more than a little terrifying to me. When governments can throw you in prison for *not* doing something (and keep in mind that this list of things you can't not do is going to grow, year after year, ad infinitum, as we are all compelled to support the latest cause du jour), can you really be said to be free?

"those who disagree need to be punished and forced to accept and participate in the legally established pro-abortion standard of morality."

Wow. I'm not going to bother posting here anymore, you're out of your mind.

"you're out of your mind."

There are times when I really hope I am.

Title length. I see. but you can understand the confusion.

The difficulty with the issue of personal values being overridden by the state has always been with us. I think it always will. I don't think it gets worse, it's just the focus that changes.

If the doctor was elected as County Abortionist, then refused to perform abortions, then yes, you could force the doctor to perform abortions.

Tolstoy for County Abortionist 2016

If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve.

"If Christian marriage license clerks aren't allowed to refuse to license gay marriages, why not?"
This is really very simple.

Government agents/employees/officials are the only ones certified to issue marriage licenses, the government itself issues them and, under the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th amendment of the constitution, must issue licenses to anyone who is qualified to receive them.

Doctors committing abortions are not government officials performing a service that is reserved strictly to the government to provide. Doctors may choose to offer or not offer any legal service they wish without having any fear of falling foul of the 14th amendment. And as far as I know, a doctor in the United States is never REQUIRED to offer or perform ANY service that he/she does not wish to provide -- even if he/she is qualified to provide it. (And let's not even get started on the American government being prohibited from providing or funding abortions in the first place -- which would be a necessary element if your analogy were to have any genuine standing to it.)

^Or, what 2WL said.

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for the rest!

"Doctors committing abortions are not government officials... a doctor in the United States is never REQUIRED to offer or perform ANY service that he/she does not wish to provide"

Actually, doctors are licensees of the government, and can have their licenses revoked if they refuse to give medical aid in emergency situations. Considering the flexibility of our legal system, I imagine it wouldn't take much to expand the same legal principle to include abortions.

So you could conceivably force, say, a neurologist or ophthalmologist to perform an abortion?

"So you could conceivably force, say, a neurologist or ophthalmologist to perform an abortion?"

You could, but probably wouldn't. You *would*, however, force an OB/GYN to do one, if you did not care for their personal beliefs on the subject.

Hospitals are private institutions. They have their doctors under contract to perform certain tasks. If you don't condone abortions, don't specialize in that field and definitely don't sign a contract that requires you to. Most gynecologist contracts require the doctor to be able to, and when necessary, perform abortions. Though I'm not too sure how many Christian fundamentalists go into a feild that requires you to look at different women's vaginas.

Most hospitals have several gynecologists staffed so it shouldn't really be a problem with the hospital either. If one is unable to perform it then they just look at the schedules of the ones who can and when someone want to schedule an appointment for an abortion, the available times can be given to them.

http://www.theonion.com/graphic/christian-science-pharmacist-refuses-to-fill-any-p-9645

"Though I'm not too sure how many Christian fundamentalists go into a feild that requires you to look at different women's vaginas."

This is the kind of anti-religious bigotry that leads to demands that religious people do things they find objectionable on pain of imprisonment.

"Hospitals are private institutions."

With over 50% of all health care expenditures coming from government and governments and insurance companies having the power to dictate what goes on through their total control of the market, hospitals are about as "private" as Krupp was every time Germany went to war.

"If you don't condone abortions, don't specialize in that field"

IOW, if you're in medical school and want to deliver babies for a living, you need to change specializations and give up on your dream job just in case the government requires you to perform abortions at some future point in your career.

"Most hospitals have several gynecologists staffed so it shouldn't really be a problem with the hospital either."

Just imagine the lawsuit when some pregnant 15-year old goes to some rural hospital for an abortion at 30 weeks and is turned away because the one doctor who doesn't mind doing late-term abortions is on vacation for the next six weeks. No insurance company is going to permit doctors' consciences to get in the way of their avalanching legal bills if doctors are declared to have a legal duty to perform abortions.

"I don't know, maybe for the same reason Catholic charities are forced to pay for health insurance for their employees that covers contraceptives?"

Nothing in the Affordable Care Act requires people who have insurance to take contraceptives. The ACA is regulating *INSURANCE*, not religion.

"Maybe it's just too inconvenient to allow people to make moral decisions that conflict with settled public policy."

The ACA regulates *INSURANCE.* People can make the moral decision to use contraceptives or not.

@Tolstoy

If you want to deliver babies, work in a real hospital. I know I said 'hospital' a lot in my previous statement, but the reality is that 96% of abortions occur in clinics. Whereas around the same percentage of births occur in hospitals.

And I'm not saying people should be forced to perform abortions if they don't want to. Actually I believe is a right that all doctors have. A doctor can refuse to perform any procedure on a patient for a specific reasons, as long as they are non discriminatory. So a doctor can refuse to perform an abortion on someone as long as they do the same for everyone.

The Zeitgeist seems to be expediency, more and more, over liberty, wouldn't you say, Tolstoy?

@Tolstoy
"Actually, doctors are licensees of the government,"
So are drivers. I fail to see how this is relevant (unless you're going to try to shoehorn in a requirement that drivers act as taxi services even if they aren't signed up with Uber).

"...and can have their licenses revoked if they refuse to give medical aid in emergency situations."
Because, you know, elective abortions are so often need urgently. But if we're switching over to talking emergency situations now, then your OP is completely off topic.

"Considering the flexibility of our legal system, I imagine it wouldn't take much to expand the same legal principle to include abortions."
Do you have evidence that this is in the offing, or are you just shooting from the hip and hoping it hits the rest of us in the gut?

"Just imagine the lawsuit when some pregnant 15-year old goes to some rural hospital for an abortion at 30 weeks and is turned away because the one doctor who doesn't mind doing late-term abortions is on vacation for the next six weeks. No insurance company is going to permit doctors' consciences to get in the way of their avalanching legal bills if doctors are declared to have a legal duty to perform abortions."
And now we continue with making assumptions instead of proving claims, with the addition now of extrapolating conclusions based on those assumptions. "If doctors are declared to have a legal duty to perform abortions," then there would have been a large step taken beyond existing law and jurisprudence. I ask again, do you have evidence that this is likely, or are you basing this on a hazy and vague (potentially alarmist) conception of the chance that some sort of judicial skulduggery might possibly result at some point in the undefined future?