Here's My Unpopular Outlook on the Midterms
Guess Who's Stopping by The View Next Week. Even Their Audience Gasped.
Scott Jennings Nailed the Dems' 2026 Strategy on CNN Last Night ...and Then...
Former Dem Congressional Candidate Rips Into Graham Platner's Top Operative
Karmelo Anthony's Dad Pushes Race Hoax Speaking About Son's Trial and Verdict
Endgames With Iran and Its Proxies
Elon Musk Reflects on SpaceX’s Wild Rise as His Company Goes Public
President Trump Just Blew a Hole in Iran's Alleged Leaked Deal
Questions Are Emerging After Thousands of Los Angeles Ballots Were Apparently Rejected
Here's What Marco Rubio Had to Say About the UFC Fight For America's...
A Chilling Message Just Appeared on the National Mall
Trump Floats Total DC Takeover If This Happens Next Week
Blue-State Blues: Why Pro Sports Teams Are Fleeing High-Tax, High-Crime Cities
Through the Strangers' Eyes
Democrats Will Become All One Thing or All the Other
Tipsheet

Protecting Life -- and Conscience

Protecting Life -- and Conscience
Witness the press outrage about "last minute Bush abortion rulings." 

So what are these heinous plans of the President's?  Only ensuring that those who decline to perform abortions because of moral or religious convictions aren't the victims of discrimination by those receiving federal money.
Advertisement


In the United States, conscientious objectors don't have to go to war -- ie, no one can force citizens to kill even America's enemies if it truly violates the dictate of their consciences.  Presumably, therefore, discrimination by the federal government based on one's status as a legitimate conscientious objector (or by those who receive its largesse) would be illegal.

If it's wrong to discriminate against those who refuse to kill even America's enemies because of religious or moral convictions, why is it somehow wrong to extend the same protections to those who refuse to kill innocent, unborn children?

Finally, for those who argue that surely no one would ever be "forced" to perform abortions on pain of legal action, take a look at Chris Fields' post about eHarmony being forced to "match" gay couples.  Once upon a time, it would have been inconceivable that a private company would be bullied by government into providing a service that violates its creator's religious beliefs.  But it happened to eHarmony, didn't it?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement