Nice to see O'Bama working on getting rid of midnight Bush rules

[kandrathe]

So, apparently, it varies from region by region. Either way, my point can be revised. When I am hired for a job, I give up my rights to refuse to do things in my job description... Unless I want to be fired. If I'm asked to do something illegal, then I could sue my employer, but that's about it. I fail to see why the religious deserve preferential treatment.

Leave religion out of it. The question is, should a professional be expected to give advice that are in opposition with their ethics and beliefs? If you do, where is the limit of expecting a person to "follow orders" regardless of the morality of those orders? When people refuse to follow orders, I believe they realize there may be a consequence for their position. Even in the military, there is a loop hole. Soldiers are only required to obey "lawful" orders, and obeying an unlawful order might equally subject them to military court martial. The decision to refuse an immoral, although legal order would be at the discretion of a court martial.

You then say, only people who believe X should be allowed to do Y. Then, who gets to decide what X is morally (not legally) acceptable? The law of the land is that X is not against the law, but it also does not mean that anyone in that profession would then be committed to laying aside their beliefs either. This is why, even in liberal states like Illinois, that medical practitioners are protected from being persecuted by decisions of conscience.