Religious people in the medical field

[brewer]

That's all well and good....................... until you have an emergency where you can't pick and choose. Medicine needs to come before religion and/or politics.

I think this law is still in effect: https://nurse.org/articles/trump-gives-h...rotection/

This is definitely news to me, and if I understand this correctly, this is opening a door to some pretty bone-headed ideas. I kind of got this mixed feeling of disgust that such a department would be created, and a sense that it's hard to get mad at the grocery store for not selling bullets; it's just not what they're in the business for. In terms of emergencies, I don't accept from my current understanding that anyone would find themselves in a situation where they'd need emergency sterilization or an emergency sexual reassignment procedure. They most certainly can find themselves in a position where they can require an emergency abortion.

Where I'm from, hospitals are either secular, Jewish or some denomination of Christianity. Private entities make their own rules and they decide what the moral standards are for medical practice. Patients may choose their provider and power always rests with the customers (patients) to cease going to religiously affiliated hospitals and seek their treatment elsewhere.

I'm not immediately opposed to doctors choosing not to perform elective procedures whether its because they're morally opposed to them or because they have selected not to undergo the necessary training to competently perform such procedures. I think that's something that the public should sway by choosing which doctors they go to. An excellent way to convey this message to doctors and hospitals is to not seek treatment with them.

... unless they're the only ones with the cure, of course.

An example of an emergency could be something like aids related pneumocystis pneumonia, post op complications from a surgery, a trans person with a burst appendix...............................

I'm not sure where you live but in the rural communities in my neck of the woods there is usually only one advanced care/emergency provider for hundreds of miles. They usually have a limited staff, very limited for nights and weekends (one doctor). These small communities are also very religious. Not to beat a dead horse (whack whack) but it's not the association of the hospital (xter/jewish/....) but the beliefs of the individual. 

I find it very disturbing that the US christian agenda has opened this door. Not very Samaritan of them huh Luke.

---

Got it.

Until we live in a communist utopia, politics will be a part of medical questions. Not all medical issues are self-evident -- different consciences may disagree. 

My point about not outlawing religious objection to medical decisions is that it works fine for us now, while we're talking about those evil right-wingers. But future cases may involve good and pure left-wingers objecting to right-wing decrees.

So for example, a relative of mine goes to a liberal Christian church in the midwest. Her pastor views it as an injunction from the New Testament to welcome immigrants to the USA. If the law restricted medical attention given to immigrants, that pastor would have to disobey it due to his religious conscience. And I would approve of his doing so. 

So we have to ask whether we're against religious objections based on conscience, or we're against religious objections based on consciences that we disagree with.

Just so you know, I'm a republican. I get your point, my position is that there are some places where decisions based on religion do not belong. Medicine is one of them. I value life over religion. You should also. And it should be non debatable.