Hi Ron,

Just catching the last hour of yesterday's show this morning and you asked whether this is just a ploy to discriminate against a woman's right to choose. I would say that yes, it is. Having said that, even though the motives are clearly not what the policy presents itself as, I think that it is a good policy. With a couple of caveats.

I'm pro-choice, but I can certainly understand and respect people being anti-abortion for themselves and I don't think that I have the right to make them do something that is in stark contrast with their principles.

However, If you are to work in health care, you have to put your personal beliefs to the side when advising a patient on their needs. This means that an anti-choice person must be required to express all commonly accepted medical options to their patients, regardless of whether they conflict with their own philosophy.

Hospitals should not be allowed to discriminate against anti-abortion applicants, EXCEPT where the position REQUIRES engaging in an activity that conflicts with their beliefs. Hospitals should not be allowed to purge an applicant based on this if they can reasonably manage to offer the procedures with other staff. That is to say, a small health clinic that has two nurses on staff that provides abortions clearly should be allowed to decline hiring an anti-abortion applicant as it would significantly impact the ability of the clinic to operate. A large hospital that can accommodate such staff and still provide the full range of services should be required to do so.

I would add that any practitioner that fails to provide all reasonable and industry accepted information to patients because some of it conflicts with their personal beliefs should lose their license. My $.02.