Here is a link to Ed Whelan’s observations on the Supreme Court’s decision in the chemical abortion case. The Supreme Court found that the pro-life doctors who challenged the FFDA’s approval of access to mifepristone did not have standing to sue. The Court did not, therefore, rule on the merits. Moreover, the Court’s decision relies […]
Category: Conscience protection
Here is a link to a good post by Teresa Collett addressing “The Religious Question and Abortion.” Collett addresses the line of questioning during the recent oral arguments in the Dobbs case by Justice Sotomayor who suggested that opposition to abortion is necessarily based on religion. I have addressed this issue in this article. Sotomayor’s […]
Here is a link to a story by Wesley Smith discussing a recent federal court decision protecting doctors who have religious objections to performing abortions.
Here is link to an excellent piece by Richard Doerflinger entitled—A Pledge Betrayed: The Obama Administration Nullifies Conscience Rights. A Pledge Betrayed: The Obama Administration Nullifies Conscience Rights
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom today rejected the right to conscience claims of Mary Doogan and Connie Wood. Doogan and Wood are midwives who “are practicing Roman Catholics who believe that human life is sacred from the moment of conception and that termination of pregnancy is a grave offence against human life.” Doogan and […]
Here is a link to a story from LifeNews, http://www.lifenews.com/2014/06/30/supreme-court-rules-obama-admin-cant-make-hobby-lobby-obey-pro-abortion-hhs-mandate/ , and a commentary I did for Aleteia.http://www.lifenews.com/2014/06/30/supreme-court-rules-obama-admin-cant-make-hobby-lobby-obey-pro-abortion-hhs-mandate/ As I explain in more detail in the commentary, “Hobby Lobby is an important, although a limited, victory for religious liberty. The decision is also a decisive rebuke to the Obama Administration’s exceedingly narrow view of religious […]
Pro-life doctors in the UK have been excluded from practicing in the specialty “sexual and reproductive health” by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, according to LifeSiteNews.com. The rule covers anyone who refuses to prescribe any form of contraception, even those that may have abortifacient effects.
If you are researching conscientious objection, you might want to look at the December 2013 issue of the International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics to see the thought of those who are trying to keep conscientious objection from affecting the availability of abortion. You may want to check your institutions databases to see if you […]
José Ignacio Martínez Estay, Vicerrector de Investigación y Postgrado at Universidad de los Andes in Chile, is looking for signatures of American professors on a letter to the editor supporting the right to life from conception to natural death and religious freedom. This is intended to counter pro-abortion letters on the other side that have US […]
Here is a post from Richard Stith– Freedom of conscience is not a Republican issue. We used to have strong bi-partisan support for religious liberty. Tragically, that consensus for conscience has been shattered by the Obama Administration. Before Obama, when members of either party voted to support contraception, for example, they included an exemption […]