I'd complain, because it isn't the federal government's job to tell hospitals what legal procedures they can and cannot do without any regard for the means or ethics of the doctors and owners.

I absolutely disagree. A hospital should be responsible for caring for people, regardless of the individual beliefs of the owners or doctors there.

For example, if a hospital refuses to treat gay people, it shouldn't receive government funding, because that funding needs to treat everyone equally. Similarly, if a hospital only treats Muslims, it should again be refused funding.

Extending this concept a little, if a hospital refuses to treat AIDS because it is a "gay disease" or if a hospital refuses to perform a circumcision because it is a "Christian procedure", this hospital should not receive federal funding.

If the government is funding a hospital, that hospital had better be treating all patients equally and fully, regardless of and moral convictions it may have.

I don't mean to make a statement on whether abortion should be legal or illegal. I mean to say only that the government should not fund hospitals which deny treatment because they are morally or ethically opposed to something.

I assume you're referring to pre-born babies too, right?

Better health care????????????
dead iraqi children - Google Image Search

Hospitals shouldn't recieve government funding, period.

I don't believe that hospitals should be able to deny care to anyone. That is not what I meant. My point was that not every hospital is able to preform every procedure, because some procedures, like abortion for example, require specialized equipment. Specialized equipment is expensive. Another issue is specialists. I would prefer a doctor who specializes in abortions, if I ever needed one. (Hopefully that won't ever be a problem.)

Like any specific medical condition, if people need abortions, they should go to specialists, many of whom operate private clinics.

Abortions are a specialized service, and if a hospital chooses not to offer them, that's the hospital's business. I do mean business. It's about the bottom line.

And that is one of the MAIN REASONS we have "legalized" abortion in the United States!



Also... if the government does not pony up with any financing for hospitals, I don't think they have any right to say that any hospital cannot refuse treatment to people. If it's just "business for the bottom line", then each hospital could legally refuse treatment to those who can't pay. It'd be no different, in that way, than a health club. Pay or you don't play.

I'd say that the availability of safe abortions is a vital part of quality healthcare.

Have you ever read Freakonomics? I highly reccomend it. What it says about Abortion may surprise you.

Yes. Very familiar with it.

But let's not make believe that it's the definitive word on abortion.


And you're all still refusing to acknowledge the main point: Abortion ends the life of a pre-born human being. It is murder.

All abortions for reasons unrelated to that of the life of the mother are tragic and murder of innocence.

I highly disaggree unless we are taking out life insurance policies on miscarriages these days.