Pretty much

the only 2 hospital networks in my area are literally named Trinity and Genesis, very blatant religious connotations there.

Catch some deathbed conversions mostly.

Agreed. If you want to be a pharmacist, then be prepared to dispense contraceptives. If that conflicts with your religious beliefs, then you better figure our what you're going to do with your life before you become a pharmacist.

At least in countries that charge patients money for their healthcare, these religious hospitals are free, right?

A few, but not remotely all. It's really up to the individual hospital.

Then you've got the weird case of St. Jude's which is somehow not a Catholic hospital despite literally being built as a shrine to St. Jude Thaddeus (patron saint of hopeless causes) by a Catholic man to fulfill a promise he made to build a shrine to St. Jude. St. Jude's also does not charge patients for treatment, travel, housing, or food though they will bill insurance where possible.

This is my reason for my answer to the pro-choice question. It is only a baby once you have decided to carry it to term. Before that decision it isn't.

Dual homicide if you kill a pregnant woman who wanted a child. Not a baby when aborting an unwanted pregnancy.

I would really like to see someone who is getting their degree or license push back on the requirement to rotate through a religious hospital, on the grounds that it violates the religious freedoms of the students.

If we’re going to have unconstitutional religious freedom laws, we may as well try and use them against our oppressors.

This is really it. If a doctor has a moral objection to abortions, maybe gynecology wasn't the right discipline for them to practice. That's on them, and they should be upfront about it being a personal moral objection and for them to seek another doctor.

I'm fine with that compromise, because I suspect those doctors are and will remain the minority, and everyone's rights are preserved.

But if a chief of medicine, or worse, a board of non-doctors, says their hospital won't perform abortions on religious grounds? Then fuck you, you're not a hospital, you are a faith-based healing center, and need to be treated as such.

Hospital administration needs to be science-based care and check their religion at the door, especially if they aren't directly practicing. They shouldn't be making decisions that directly effect people that they are indirectly related to based upon someone's interpretation of an old anthology of fables.

That's fine. Just don't expect to keep your medical license as you sit around doing nothing as people die of preventable deaths.

If you're a doctor, your job is to save lives. If you intentionally fail to do that job it shouldn't be your job.

If a fireman refused to put out a fire because they didn't feel like it, they'd be lose their job too.

I disagree somewhat. If a doctor is practicing in a situation where an abortion is necessary, it was their duty to not be a doctor if they find that morally repugnant.

should hospitals be allowed to force or forbid doctors from providing medical care?

They provide the facilities, which includes administration and legal and billing. So in that regard, they have to have some kind of say, simply because they need to stock the equipment, train the nurses/MAs, and establish standard protocols for a given procedure. Otherwise, how do you contest a medical malpractice claim?

A doctor (Catholic or not) should never, and can never, be forced to perform a medical procedure, including abortions. And they also shouldn’t be forbidden from performing a medical procedure.

Doctors can and do regularly incur liability if they fail to perform certain necessary medical procedures, particularly in emergency room settings. A doctor that fails to follow protocol can be subject to malpractice. If, for instance, a Christian Scientist doctor refused to provide a blood transfusion to an individual suffering from sever blood loss or a narcotics prohibitionist doctor attempts to do surgery without providing anesthesia, they can get in some serious trouble.

Religious convictions don't override medical protocols. What's at issue is the legality of the protocols as they stand. Can a woman whose health is at risk from pregnancy receive an abortion without the doctors incurring criminal liability?

Right now, it appears that State AGs in prohibitionist states are threatening the licenses and freedoms of doctors who would provide life-saving care. Hospital administrators are acting as intermediaries because the hospital itself would suffer legal liability if staff knowingly permitted/facilitated an illegal procedure.

Imagine I'm a doctor who refuses to prescribe medication because it makes people weak.

Sadly, I have met actual Catholics who believe this.

If they want to have an argument on the Internet they don't need to make up a bad take; it's an abundant resource on the web.

Or even accidentally. I'd prefer my doctors to be familiar with the procedures they do. I don't want the doctor that hasn't done something in a decade of there's another option reasonably available.

I'd like to believe that the vast majority of doctors care about the lives of their patients and are capable of weighing that against the viability of the fetus.

Ok, and?

Nah, for the catholic hospital staff they probably shouldn’t have a job if it goes against their personal ethics.

But organizations do not have religion.

Does refusing to program a drone prevent a cancer patient from receiving treatment? Do these drones prevent organ rupture in ectopic pregnancies? When asked to program armed drones, are you also sitting face-to-face with a person who is suffering or dying because you aren’t actively programming them?

The denial of healthcare involves victims. Nobody’s hurt when you refuse to do a drone-programming job, but witholding a medically-necessary abortion directly results in avoidable human suffering. That’s the key difference that makes these situations incomparable.

In both your programmer case and the case of the catholic hospital staff member you have a very clear option, you can not work at that facility. Don't want to write code for military weapons, cool then work somewhere that doesn't do that. Don't want to provide abortions at your work, cool then work in a medical facility that doesn't provide them. Many facilities don't perform abortions just because they aren't intended to, such as clinics etc so you should work there.

Your programmer case also doesn't make sense because extending the metophor you want companies to be allowed to not develop software that is used by the military...they can already do that.

Then don't get a job at a defense company. If you don't want to provide abortions, don't get a job at a hospital.

'Even catholic'. Fuck me i lolled

So up until recently Catholic views were accepted by "liberal" society?

Stop it.

Catholic priests raps kids for centuries. Fuck em.