Pro-Life Nurse Refuses to Assist in Abortion of Down Syndrome Child

[Ave Maria]

So, what else will this burse not do?

Give out contraceptives or condomes?

I hope that woman gets the ax! If she only wishes to perform "moral" medicine, she should go to a christian run clinic!

I hope she keeps her job and is able to keep it for a long time. I would definitely applaud her even more if she was not handing out contraceptives and condoms.

 

[eldermike]

Actually God is the One who gets the credit. Natural man would kill the child, afterall is a right. In the natural world rights are more important than defective babies. But God loves them all the same, He also knows that we can't love in this manner, especially when we are caught in the trap of our self worth and self worship.
God sometimes puts us in this discussion knowing that someone caught in the natural world will come home.
Praise God for her witness.

 

[CyberPaladin]

Glad to see someone standing up against the horrible partice of abortion and the attempts to bully medical professionals into praticpating in it.

 

[flicka]

She isn't a hero in any sense, just someone who has isn't willing to do her job 100% of the time. Her employer will now have to deal with making sure they are staffed to handle all legal medical procedures to avoid her personal limits effecting the patients. If it continues to be a problem then it will become obvious that this job isn't a good fit and she will most likely need to find another one.

 

[Blackness]

Of all the things I support most Christians dont, abortion is not one of them, its called adoption people...

 

[bammertheblue]

Hmmm...does this mean if tomorrow I decide that answering the phone at my job is against my morals, I don't have to do it anymore and won't be reprimanded?

 

[BlackAndy]

Hmmm...does this mean if tomorrow I decide that answering the phone at my job is against my morals, I don't have to do it anymore and won't be reprimanded?

Most people in the medical profession do so out of a desire to heal people. Not MURDER people.

So, if tomorrow your employer asks you to bash the phone over a clients head.... feel free to disobey that order.

 

[theeyesoftammyfaye]

Most people in the medical profession do so out of a desire to heal people. Not MURDER people.

So, if tomorrow your employer asks you to bash the phone over a clients head.... feel free to disobey that order.

bashing a phone over someone's head would, in most normal circumstances, be quite illegal.

performing an abortion, in most normal circumstances, is quite LEGAL.

two different things here.

(by the way, your use of the loaded word "murder" is nothing but heated rhetoric)

 

[SisterGeoff]

Most people in the medical profession do so out of a desire to heal people. Not MURDER people.

While this will likely get removed I cannot abide the constant abuse of legal terms for emotonal effect. Abortion due to the fact that it is legal cannot be murder even if it were classed as homocide, which it is not, as for a homocide to be murder it must firstly be unlawful. Please go find another word to use when aiming for emotonal impact and leave narrowly defined legal ones alone.

So, if tomorrow your employer asks you to bash the phone over a clients head.... feel free to disobey that order.

This person took a job in a area of the medical field when it is resonable to exspect that abortions would be part of practice. I have no sympathy whatsoever for some one who takes a job knowing full well what it will entail then refuse to do it. I hope they are fired.

 

[fanatiquefou]

She has every right to refuse to assist with an abortion.

However, if assisting in abortions is meant to be one of her job duties, she does NOT have the right to be able to keep that job without consequences or being reprimanded. Part of making a stand is recognizing that what you are choosing may have negative consequences for yourself - such as losing a job.

 

[SisterGeoff]

I hope she keeps her job and is able to keep it for a long time.

You hope that a person who refuses to do the duties of their job gets to keep their job?

I would definitely applaud her even more if she was not handing out contraceptives and condoms.

Why, those prevent unwanted pregnecys and the abortions they often prompt.

 

[bammertheblue]

Most people in the medical profession do so out of a desire to heal people. Not MURDER people.

So, if tomorrow your employer asks you to bash the phone over a clients head.... feel free to disobey that order.

Abortion is legal. It is not murder. You can get emotional as much as you want, but that doesn't change the fact that it's legal.

 

[flicka]

Of all the things I support most Christians dont, abortion is not one of them, its called adoption people...

Adoption and abortion are not interchangable. you can't just adopt out a child with no brain, for example, or an 8week old fetus.

I can't imagine this nurse will want to work in an environment where abortions take place. Not assisting in an abortion will only carry her so far before she realizes that it doesn't matter, abortions are going to keep taking place and she will have to deal with the people who perform them on a daily basis. I'd look for another gig if I were her, but I don't think she should be fired.

 

[BlackAndy]

loaded words? Abuse of legal terms? Are you guys serious?
How should I define the taking of an innocent life then?
How shall I sanitize the truth so you can put your conscience at ease?
How about liquidation?
When the Nazi's killed the handicapped they termed it "mercy killing." (and spare me the Godwin's Law bit, as if that makes the comparison void. I've already covered that, anyway.)

How about embryotic expulsion?

 

[BlackAndy]

And you can call it legal all you want. The ULTIMATE AUTHORITY has spoken on this issue long ago:

Exodus 21:22 "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

If you are a Christian and you condone such a barbaric and wicked practice- you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[fanatiquefou]

And you can call it legal all you want. The ULTIMATE AUTHORITY has spoken on this issue long ago:

Exodus 21:22 "If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

If you are a Christian and you condone such a barbaric and wicked practice- you should be ashamed of yourself.

The verse you have quoted says exactly the opposite of what you think it says. It declares that only the life or health of the woman requires life for life. A miscarriage is not considered to be on the same level as harming or killing a woman.

 

[BlackAndy]

The verse you have quoted says exactly the opposite of what you think it says. It declares that only the life or health of the woman requires life for life. A miscarriage is not considered to be on the same level as harming or killing a woman.

WRONG.

 

[Fantine]

If a law is passed it should probably follow the same lines as Conscientious Objector legislation.

During Vietnam, many people objected to the war on "moral" grounds (as many, probably, as are objecting to the Iraq war today.)

But there were two qualifications for conscientious objectors: 1) they had to be opposed to ALL wars and 2) they had to be a member of an organized religion that opposed war--Quakers, for example. (If not, they had to have tons and tons of substantiating evidence.)

And so a nurse or doctor objecting on moral grounds should 1) oppose ALL abortions, not just abortions after the first trimester. They should oppose abortions no matter how compelling or how frivolous the reason is. 2) They should belong to a religious group that opposes abortion. Why?

Because there is no Constitutional guideline for when life begins--there are only religious guidelines. A better definition might be when "ensoulment" begins.

I think this would be fairer and would take away the air of pompous self-righteousness that can so often accompany requests like these.

The requester is basically saying: "I belong to a religious organization that says that life (ensoulment) begins at conception. I respect the beliefs of my colleagues to act otherwise, if their religions or belief systems are different from mine, because there is no legal definition in this country of when life begins."

Sure, it's a tough standard. And I daresay that most medical personnel are probably reluctant to assist in 22 week abortions

And a high burden of proof will insure that what is basically a religious conscientious objection doesn't become a loophole to get out of parts of a job an employee doesn't like.

 

[BlackAndy]

If a law is passed it should probably follow the same lines as Conscientious Objector legislation.

During Vietnam, many people objected to the war on "moral" grounds (as many, probably, as are objecting to the Iraq war today.)

But there were two qualifications for conscientious objectors: 1) they had to be opposed to ALL wars and 2) they had to be a member of an organized religion that opposed war--Quakers, for example. (If not, they had to have tons and tons of substantiating evidence.)

And so a nurse or doctor objecting on moral grounds should 1) oppose ALL abortions, not just abortions after the first trimester. They should oppose abortions no matter how compelling or how frivolous the reason is. 2) They should belong to a religious group that opposes abortion. Why?

Because there is no Constitutional guideline for when life begins--there are only religious guidelines. A better definition might be when "ensoulment" begins.

I think this would be fairer and would take away the air of pompous self-righteousness that can so often accompany requests like these.

The requester is basically saying: "I belong to a religious organization that says that life (ensoulment) begins at conception. I respect the beliefs of my colleagues to act otherwise, if their religions or belief systems are different from mine, because there is no legal definition in this country of when life begins."

Sure, it's a tough standard. And I daresay that most medical personnel are probably reluctant to assist in 22 week abortions

And a high burden of proof will insure that what is basically a religious conscientious objection doesn't become a loophole to get out of parts of a job an employee doesn't like.

Not directed at you fantine, but some previous posters:

Instead of murder... how about we call it DESOULMENT? Would that help you sleep at night?

 

[fanatiquefou]

Not directed at you fantine, but some previous posters:

Instead of murder... how about we call it DESOULMENT? Would that help you sleep at night?

BlackAndy, the issue is not nearly as black and white as you think it is. And believe it or not, the people who disagree with you on this issue are not demons or heartless killers. Lay off the insults and hyperbole - it does absolutely nothing to further discussion to accuse your opponents of being evil.

And, by the way, I have no trouble sleeping at night.