Dear Peter Hume,

Have you had a reality check lately? (Not to mention an eyesight test.)

Just as an aside - you are quite correct: "a [legal] right is nothing more and nothing less than whatever the State orders". And, 'yes': this is the legal and moral right we have accorded them - by election - in a "democratic society".

Are you anti-democratic? Is our society flawed because it does not have a totally egalitarian basis of decision-making that allows minority views to dominate societal directions?

What planet do you people come from??

You have the luxury of being an "armchair critic" - only because our democratic society allows it!

Name one other international regime that would allow you even to exist - let alone express your 1950's bohemian dogma!!

Amanda,

It is clear that you started with your conclusion then chose logic to justify it. Sadly what you arrived at was the stand hotch potch or reasoning apposite to a zealotic campaign (act of faith, no logic required).

Clearly this is your BELIEF and as such you are entitled to it. I have to say you do seem overly imbued the higher status of your career. So much so that you not only feel you have the duty to practice medicine but also to preach your form of PERSONAL church influenced morality.

I might humbly suggest that you chose which horse you want to ride.
I'm reasonably sure that the Hippocratic oath/ MD doesn't come with a pulpit for your surgery. People come to you for medicine (full stop). You would be wise to leave the soul saving for another venue. Likewise the ethical arguments to people that are equipped to deliver them.

Having lived in New Guinea at a time when medicine came on a bible and spent my time at the coal face crisis intervention. I've seen what damage views as naive and self-righteous as you can do. Life in the real world isn't black or white, rather a continuum of greys. If you're lucky you'll call the majority an nill all draw.

By all means have your religious beliefs but don't confuse them with medicine....simple pass the patient on without the sermon have you considered a career as a opinion columnist true they are as helpful as herpes but it pays well AND you can preach all you want.

You people get overrun with you own emotions.
The only ones that want a bill of rights is the same ones that would have us still living in the stone age.
What rights don't you have now, that a bill of rights would create for you.
Look at the mess in America with their rights.
Common rights are forever changing, so why complicate the situation.
I cannot think of a single thing that i would want that i cannot get now.
I can only forsee this as a lever for people with a hidden agenda.

Dear Dr Fairweather,

off-topic I realise, except to clarify my meaning regarding some folks' poor decision-making skills. Around 18 months ago or so there was a rare and totally unexpected knock on my apartment door one early evening. Expecting an emergency call from the landlord, I opened the door to one of the most beautiful human beings I have ever seen on televison, but she was there at my door, just moved in next door that day and hadn't unpacked her can-opener yet.

After that first surprise, I saw in her eyes that beauty was from her soul, so rare in this decadent city of mine. She returned that can-opener 15 minutes later and went back to have dinner. A few weeks later, She told me one afternoon across the balconies of our hi-rise coastal apartments just north of Fremantle that she was a 'graduate' med' student, (whatever that means?), so I hope that if you ever practice medicine in Perth and meet another doctor of the same first name, that you might see in her that same human quality that I saw in her eyes, and learn from it.

I knew from that first moment, with that look in her eyes, that she would take her own life before murdering another. I sensed that same goodness in your article before I recognised the similar first names and vocations. She moved out of these apartments six months ago. I will always remember her.

Sorry if it's an off-topic post. I feel obliged to add this because I have a good memory and rarely meet good people. You may one day know that wonderful person that lived next door to me. She had the same first name as yourself.

Goodnight you kings of New England, you Princes of Maine!

Best Regards,

Sean Moran.

---o0o---

'Conventionality is not morality. Self-righteousness is not religion. To attack the first is not to assail the last.'

- Charlotte Bronte, 1847.

(from Cider House Rules)

<yes Desmond, I'm drunk again 9-) sorry mate...>

This is article is not about abortion- or if so, it is only indirectly. It is about freedom of conscience.

Has it occurred to anybody that the author is not arguing she should have the right to preach to her future patients about whether or not they should get an abortion

BUT

that she should have the right to NOT be involved in a woman getting an abortion? This means not being forced, by law, to refer a woman onto a doctor who will enable the woman to get an abortion.

Has it occured to anybody that if a woman wants an abortion she can go see another dr, without forcing the first dr to refer her on?

From the article:
"Some people would have a problem with me choosing to use my future position of influence as a doctor to tell women that it is morally wrong to end the life of their unborn offspring. In the same way, I have a problem with the State choosing to use its position of power over me, forcing me to be involved in the process that will result in an unborn human unnecessarily losing his or her life."

Personally I would LOVE a Bill of Rights- as soon as I see one that doesn't place the average Australian citizen as a secondary consideration to facilitating someone else's rights- or as the biggest threat to them.

For example, anyone proposing a Bill of Rights should answer this question:
'How will YOUR particular Bill prevent another APEC meeting, WYD2008 celebration, Harbour Bridge Tea Party promo or other invasive private takeover of a public space from happening?'
Also
'How will YOUR particular Bill prevent another Harry Seidler from overriding local wishes and building whatever he wants just because he owns the footprint it will stand on?'

No answer to these- no support from me.
And that's completely ignoring the even more serious end of the spectrum- abortion, Euthanasia, denial of medicines, jury/court duties, conscription, war participation, voting, control of infrastructure, etc.

To the article- as JL Deland made a convincing case for, sure the doctors may reserve a right to say they cannot help (due to variety of hypothetical cases)- but I believe that should be backed up with a right for the patient to kindly keep their money after the NON-consultation instead of paying you just to say "Sorry I won't help you" and wasting their time.
Citizens and consumers have WAY too few rights in this country at the moment.