The Biden administration is still laser-focused on pushing abortion after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. The White House issued a press release announcing that it was considering instituting a rule ostensibly designed to prevent discrimination in health care. However, some fear it would also target doctors who have religious convictions that would bar them from offering abortions and other procedures.
The proposed rule will prohibit “discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, and disability in certain health programs and activities,” according to the press release. “This proposed rule restores and strengthens civil rights protections for patients and consumers in certain federally funded health programs and HHS programs after the 2020 version of the rule limited its scope and power to cover fewer programs and services.”
Doesn’t sound so bad so far, right? Well, it gets worse.
The press release also further explains that the rule would prevent discrimination based on sex and “reiterates protections from discrimination for seeking reproductive health care services.”
The rule “[m]akes clear that discrimination on the basis of sex includes discrimination on the basis of pregnancy or related conditions, including ‘pregnancy termination.’” This would apply to any health care facility that takes federal funding.
Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra argued that the rule is a necessity to prevent discrimination, especially when it comes to the LGBTQ community.
“Standing with communities in need is critical, particularly given increased attacks on women, trans youth, and health care providers,” he said. “Health care should be a right not dependent on looks, location, love, language, or the type of care someone needs.”
Speaking of the Alphabet Community, the rule could also compel doctors to perform gender transition surgery, even if they do not agree with transgender ideology.
If implemented, the rule will reverse conscience protections established under former President Donald Trump. These protections allowed medical professionals to opt out of performing procedures that contradicted their personal or religious beliefs.
The United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB) criticized the proposed rule. In a written statement, it said it would “threaten [the Catholic Church’s] ability to carry out our healing ministries [and] mandates health care workers to perform life-altering surgeries to remove perfectly healthy body parts.”
The bishops also questioned the rule’s promise to protect religious liberty. “Assurances that HHS will honor religious freedom laws offer little comfort when HHS is actively fighting court rulings that declared HHS violated religious freedom laws the last time they tried to impose such a mandate,” the statement read. “We call on HHS to explicitly disavow any such intent.”
Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel for Becket, a nonprofit law firm representing Christian medical professionals against the rule, told the Catholic News Agency that it would stop doctors from refusing to offer “gender-affirming” procedures to people – including minors – who wish to transition to the opposite gender.
“A hospital that would perform a hysterectomy for a woman with uterine cancer would also have to perform a hysterectomy for a woman who wants to transition to living as a man. If not, [it would be] guilty of sex discrimination and subject to multi-million-dollar penalties,” Goodrich said.
In fact, this very scenario is outlined in the rule itself. Those who refuse to go along with the rule could face crippling fines.
Despite the Biden administration’s assurances, the bishops are right to express skepticism about its commitment to religious liberty. With Roe overturned, Democrats are on the warpath. If they have to use the state to force medical professionals to offer abortions and “gender-affirming” treatments, they will. These folks have already shown they are willing to go to extreme means to push their agenda. Indeed, Democratic lawmakers have repeatedly refused to condemn violence against pro-life organizations. If they find this type of violence acceptable, they will have no problem using the power of the state.
Of course, the rule will likely be challenged in court if implemented. So far, pro-lifers appear to have been prepared for these attacks. If they are as aggressive as the pro-abortion crowd trying to force doctors to do their bidding, they could prevent them from winning on this particular issue.
