Protecting Life -- and Conscience
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.
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?