Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
The importance of freedom of religion
In Texas, a Catholic bishop made two hospitals cease doing tube-tying operations for women who are not going to have more babies. In Arizona, a nun was excommunicated and the hospital where she works was expelled from the church after 116 years for allowing doctors to terminate a pregnancy to save a woman's life. At the same time, some doctors and other health professionals have faced disciplinary action for refusing to perform procedures or provide medications that go against their religious beliefs.
Should Catholic hospitals be able to restrict doctors from performing common and legal medical practices? Do such restrictions unfairly impinge on the rights of non-Catholic patients and doctors, particularly those in rural or underserved areas where alternative hospitals are not readily available?
Freedom of religion is a cherished ideal in America, even though at times it has not been provided to those whose beliefs run counter to mainstream or politically correct thinking. Nevertheless, it is a goal we should continually strive for and support as much as possible. With that in mind, hospitals that are owned and run by the Catholic Church, or by any other religious organization, should definitely be able to restrict doctors and other health care professionals in their employment from performing those procedures that go against their stated religious beliefs and doctrine. At the same time, there must also be certain conditions and caveats, because nothing exists in a vacuum.
First, it should be made clear to all potential patients, doctors and staff at such hospitals that certain procedures will not be performed. Second, the hospitals should not receive or be limited in their ability to receive federal funding available to hospitals. Third, religion run hospitals in areas where they are the only such medical facility serving the community must take this fact into consideration and not be allowed to turn away someone who needs immediate life-saving treatment, whatever it is. Non-life-aaving procedures that run counter to their religious beliefs, such as tubal ligation (tube-tying), should not be forced upon such hospitals.
It is true that medical facilities have a responsibility toward the communities in which they exist, but this should not mean they can't be faithful to their belief systems as well. For those who claim to be adamant that the health of women should trump every other consideration, their words are often more rhetoric than substance. If they actually believed it, then they would seek to mandate that all women eat only healthy, whole grain, organic, vegetarian food, that they exercise regularly,do yoga and get sufficient sleep every night, and that they not be allowed to consume alcohol, tobacco products, refined sugars, etc., Who is ready, willing, or even desirous of making such mandates? We should all be concerned about the health of everyone, not just women, but we should not become so narrowly obsessed that we force our views on others in every situation.
Whenever people of different beliefs systems live together in a society, there often needs to be give and take. People should be allowed to follow their own belief systems provided these do not justify or include the harming of others. There are many Catholic hospitals in poor communities where they serve a vital function. In most situations, they should be allowed to do so within the context of their own beliefs and should not be forced to go against them for the convenience of others. Again, if a serious and life threatening situation arises, then such hospitals must be able to bend their doctrines to save that life. In all other situations, they should be granted freedom of religion and appreciated for the service they provide.
By
Ramdas Lamb
|
January 28, 2011; 10:42 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Conversion, murder and India's Supreme Court |
Next: Does God keep exclusive agents?
Posted by: justsayin10 | January 31, 2011 5:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment
But, of course, the Catholic hospitals have been receiving government funds and secular donations. They owe the community the services they promised, not the services that some ignorant bishop thinks counts as medicine.
It is quite clear that the bishops are neither qualified nor interested in making rational medical decisions. This is about their attempts to make themselves more powerful at the expense of patients.
Posted by: david6 | January 29, 2011 12:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Thank you for standing up for freedom of religion.
Posted by: jctaram | January 28, 2011 8:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Lamb, you state that a religious hospital should "bend" their doctrine to save a life. First, when something is deemed a "moral absolute" by a faith, then it is something which cannot be bent. To bend it would be against the doctrine, and would diminish the status of "moral absolute."
Second, the Bishop, in his opinion, is saving lives by not allowing abortions; the lives of the fetuses. Whether you agree with that or not, it is always important to respect the beliefs of others and to attempt to see things from their point-of-view.
That being said, I completely agree on the importance of religious freedom. Well done!