Moral objections justified

By Dan Kurtz

This meddling of the editorial board smacks of a liberal agenda and threatens to skew the issue at hand. If anything, the editorial board’s stance is an assault on people’s right to have and act upon their opinions. It is ironic that this attack is found in the opinion section. This is not a run around of Roe v. Wade. This rule does not take away an individual’s right to terminate the results of their actions.

All this rule says is that people with moral objections to these controversial practices aren’t required to aid in the execution of the procedure. Why is it that in the land of the free an individual can only help others by working in the medical community if they agree to provide people with information on how to perform what they believe to be murder?