To: 1stFreedom
"On the specific situation in Connecticut concerning Catholic hospitals that may be required to distribute the drug against their religious requirements,"
They have an uphill battle - there have been lots of test cases about withholding medical treatment for religious reasons... I am not aware of any big victories... They've put people in jail for refusing to participate in blood transfusions, for example.
2 posted on
03/13/2006 6:37:02 PM PST by
gondramB
(Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's.)
To: gondramB
Amazing that only 40-some years ago CT was ANTI-CONTRACEPTIVE in the Griswold case. New England, to a large extent, has turned into a moral wasteland. It may have gorgeous scenery, wonderful historical landmarks, many fine folks and some good culture, but there is plenty to be ashamed of!
3 posted on
03/13/2006 7:18:18 PM PST by
guitarist
To: gondramB
There has been no difficulty in having a "conscience clause" allowing concerned individuals and Catholic institutions to avoid participating in abortions. The problem is, the view that using the Plan B pill constitutes "abortion" is held by very few. In the setting of treating victims of sexual assault, to require them to seek help elsewhere for pregnancy prevention is, in my opinion, inhumane and cruel. The hospital system I work at is Catholic, and we routinely offer emergency contraception in sexual assault cases.
4 posted on
03/13/2006 7:22:41 PM PST by
ER Doc
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson