(July 2, 2014 at 6:45 pm)Losty Wrote:(July 2, 2014 at 5:06 pm)Rhythm Wrote: b-mine.
There are unspoken assumptions here, and out of hand dismissals of any other alternative. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm asking you to apply your argument -in favor- of something objectionable, and then tell us what you think. It's a thought experiment.
I don't understand how it's relevant?
We need doctors. Everyone. All of society. They must be required to drop their personal issues at the door and do their jobs. It's a necessity. Otherwise people would be dying left and right as doctors are refusing to help them if they were injured while doing something the doctors find morally objectionable.
This type of requirement doesn't apply to anything outside of doctors that I can think of.
I just don't get where you are going with this.
Regarding objection of conscience, I will ask the question you have not yet answered. What is your proposal on a democratic society? To force doctors to abstain from being objectors? Wouldn't that be forcing an absolute view on their conscience? If we want doctors in a society, we should give them conditions, rights and duties, it's our job, if less people start wanting to become doctors we would be in a big mess. In portugal we are already struggling while we hire doctors from cuba, spain, mexico, we need more med universities.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you