26Jul 2025 by Post

Attacks on Medical Conscience Will Force Doctors to Take Human Life

abortion, assisted suicide, Australia, bioethics, British Columbia, Canada, doctors, euthanasia, Ezekiel Emanuel, health care, health professionals, Hippocratic moral values, Hippocratic Oath, hospice, hospitals, human life, Julian Savulescu, medical conscience, medical school, medical values, Medicine, nurses, nursing homes, nursing school, Ontario, patients, Reproductive Science, transgenderism
Destroying conscience will inhibit talented people with particular moral or religious beliefs from entering medical and nursing schools. Source
Read More
22Mar 2020 by Post

In Argentina, Doctor Sentenced to Prison for Refusing to Terminate Pregnancy

abortion, adoption, animal personhood, ape, Argentina, BioEdge, bioethics, Culture & Ethics, doctor, gynecology, habeas corpus, Hippocratic Oath, human exceptionalism, human life, Leandro Rodriguez Lastra, legal impossibility, medical conscience, Medicine, moral impossibility, orangutan, pregnancy, rape, Rodríguez Lastra, Sweden, zoo
In Sweden, midwives can be fired and deemed unemployable for refusing abortion. In Ontario, Canada, doctors can face professional discipline for refusing to administer (or refer for) euthanasia. Ditto to refusing an abortion in Victoria, Australia. In California, a Catholic hospital is being sued — with the explicit blessing of the courts — for refusing to allow a transgender hysterectomy. But now in Argentina, the right to obtain an abortion has been declared so fundamental that an objecting M.D. can be held criminally culpable for refusing to terminate a pregnancy. An Impossibility? That would seem to be a moral and legal impossibility. But Argentina just elevated the “medical conscience” controversy to a whole new level of concern — from the potential of not “only” having one’s professional license revoked, but…
Read More
04Dec 2019 by Post

No Harm, No Foul — What If Darwinism Were Excised from Biology?

Adam C. Soloff, Amir Marcovitz, appendectomy, bacteria, bats, behavior, cephalectomy, Daphne Major island, Darwin Devolves, Darwin's Finches, Darwinism, Darwinspeak, dolphins, echolocation, Evolution, Galápagos Islands, Hippocratic Oath, homeostasis, Illustra Media, Immune System, introgressive hybridization, Jerry Coyne, Marcos Eberlin, Michael Behe, Michael T. Lotze, Peter and Rosemary Grant, pharynx, Philip Skell, phylogeny, PNAS, primum non nocere, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Richard Dawkins, sound generation, tonsillectomy, turtles, whales
Some biologists might shudder at the thought of eliminating Darwinism from their scientific work. A “Darwin-ectomy” sounds more painful than a tonsillectomy or appendectomy. To hard-core evolutionists, it might sound like a cephalectomy (removal of the head)! If Darwinism is as essential to biology as Richard Dawkins or Jerry Coyne argues, then removing evolutionary words and concepts should make research incomprehensible.  If, on the other hand, Darwinism is more of a “narrative gloss” applied to the conclusions after the scientific work is done, as the late Philip Skell observed, then biology would survive the operation just fine. It might even be healthier, slimmed down after disposing of unnecessary philosophical baggage. Here are some recent scientific papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) to use as test…
Read More