https://www.naturalnews.com/2025-12-10-judge-blocks-rule-protecting-workers-forced-abortions.html
Scumbag judge
"
Obama-appointed Judge Paul Engelmayer overturned a Trump-era rule that would have shielded health care workers from being forced to perform abortions against their religious or moral convictions, falsely labeling it "unconstitutional."
AI GENERATED
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, & before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee." — Jeremiah 1:5
Pro-life–supporting critique of the article
The article rightly frames the court rulings as a direct assault on conscience rights, which are foundational to both religious liberty and ethical medicine. Forcing doctors, nurses, or hospitals to participate in abortions against deeply held moral or religious convictions violates long-standing protections recognized in U.S. law for decades, including the principle that the state may not compel individuals to act against conscience absent the most compelling justification. Abortion does not meet that threshold, particularly when alternative providers exist.
The critique of judicial activism is also well-grounded. The rulings do not simply interpret statutes narrowly; they actively weaken protections that were designed to prevent coercion. By labeling conscience safeguards as "ambiguous" or "retroactive," the judges effectively privilege abortion access over First Amendment freedoms, signaling that participation in abortion is becoming an ideological mandate rather than a voluntary medical act. That is a dangerous precedent in any pluralistic society.
On Medicaid funding, the article correctly highlights the false dilemma often presented by abortion advocates. Defunding Planned Parenthood does not eliminate women's healthcare. Thousands of federally qualified health centers provide cancer screenings, prenatal care, contraception, and general medical services without performing abortions. Redirecting funds away from abortion providers aligns taxpayer spending with the moral convictions of millions of Americans who oppose subsidizing the taking of unborn life.
The article is strongest when it emphasizes that this debate is not merely political, but moral. Conscience protections exist precisely because some acts, even when legal, remain ethically contested. When the state erodes the right to refuse participation in abortion, it implicitly declares unborn life to be morally insignificant and treats dissent as discrimination. That inversion undermines both medical ethics and human dignity.
Finally, the piece correctly situates these rulings within a broader cultural trajectory in which abortion is reframed as a "human right," while the right to life and the right to moral objection are diminished. From a pro-life perspective, this is not progress but regression—one that replaces compassion for the vulnerable with coercion of the faithful and silence toward the unborn.
Protect the Babies 🧑🍼👩🍼👨🍼🤱🚼👼👶🐥🐤🐣🍼
