podkane wrote: "If you don't believe in life-saving organ transplants, or blood transfusions, or even giving anaesthesia during childbirth (the bible DOES state uncategorically, "In pain shall you bring forth children..") then you can't be a medical professional - or your responsibilities will necessarily be limited."
So, all doctors MUST perform abortions since abortion is considered a valid medical procedure by the AMA?
Judicial prudence dictates that courts not decide cases that fail to come to them in the proper form, or in judicial lingo, are not justiciable. The justiciability requirement is a conservative value, and one Freepers should support. Elements of justiciability are standing, mootness, ripeness, political question, and most importantly case and controversy.
This case was dismissed not on the substance of the claim brought forth, but for lack of ripeness. A court cannot render a verdict when the issues have not crystallized, when the issue has not matured to the point that it is appropriate for judicial action. Sometimes that means you must break the law and suffer the consequences before the case is ripe. Sometimes it means something else.
In this case, no one has been arrested for breaking the executive order. The request by the pharmacists was for a remedy under equity law, that someone be stopped before the harm is felt. The judge ruled that this was not the appropriate action by the court. A lawyer from IL will have to tell us if the judge was correct under IL law.
I am opposed to abortion, with the Reagan exception, and my wife is a pharmacist in IL
Take a look at my # 11. The American College of Obstetricians is trying to get the Feds to pass just such a law.