Rob, at Say Anything, has a post up about Bush’s “Conscience Protection” rule, which would allows medical providers to decline care based on moral objections.

The Left tends to talk a lot about tolerance and about how people on the Right want to force our beliefs on people, but they seem to want to force everyone to not only tolerate but endorse their ideas. That is, in fact, the only serious issue I have with the idea of the government legalizing homosexual marriage (or creating a legal equivalent). It would take about a week before a Catholic Priest or some other minister would find himself the subject of a lawsuit because he tried to choose which marriages he would perform.

That said, the article Rob linked expressly says that “[t]he rule says providers — including hospitals, clinics, universities, pharmacies and doctor’s offices — can be charged with discrimination if an employee is pressured to participate in care that is ‘contrary to their religious beliefs or moral convictions.’”

I strenuously disagree with the rule as described in the LA Times article. Not for the reasons given in the article, which seem to center entirely on patient rights (as though a patient has a “right” to force a doctor to perform a procedure that he finds morally objectionable), but because it seriously curtails the employer’s right to dismiss any employee (for whom there is no express contract) for any reason at any time.

True, this isn’t as blatant a violation of Employers’ rights as, say, a city-wide ban on smoking. After all, it only affects medical providers who accept government funds. Still, I find it quite troublesome, and it serves as a reminder to those of us who are liberty-minded that, while elected Republican politicians are often better defenders of citizens’ rights than elected Democrats^[a], they’re still often less than ideal.

1. For example, did anyone see a “Free Speech Cage” at the Republican convention? Or, can you imagine what would happen if Republicans threatened a major broadcasting company for supporting Democrats? Or, for that matter, just look at the parties’ track records on The Second Amendment [↩]