The debate on GPs

The debate on GPs' reservation right rages on. Traditionally, this reservation clause not only been linked to the actual abortion procedure: Also referral and counseling on abortion, the actions

that doctors previously could refuse. This will now change. Both Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg and Health shellco credit systems Minister Anne-Grete

Strøm-Erichsen has been clear: These doctors have quit their profession. This rhetoric is not only radical left rhetoric. Also politicians from parties Right and Left support, surprisingly enough, the Government's view, Surprisingly, because this is the liberal conservative parties which have traditionally seen the value of conscience shellco credit systems and informed disagreement. It tolerant shellco credit systems democracy shellco credit

systems
This case has several shellco credit systems aspects. It is obvious shellco credit systems that the conflict can be seen in the light of different shellco credit systems world view, one secular and one religious. But conflict is not that Christians want doctors that Christian ethics should be applied when a state regulates its legislation. It would lead us out of democracy, and into theocracy. The conflict over the right of reservation involves not only that doctors reservation right is threatened.
It tolerant democracy is also threatened, and it is perhaps the most serious: One could imagine that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Health supported a view of democracy where minority's right to follow their own beliefs defended, as long as this does not hurt other people. MPs should be able to see that this is not the same as support abortion sight to Christian doctors. It is only a support for the flexible democracy.
The government's lack of understanding of doctors' wishes, may be due to a narrow understanding of what should be a "real" ethical problem. Abortion is an ethical dilemma, and you do not necessarily have a religious faith to agree to it. Whatever view one has on fetal value, abortion closing a budding human life. But the government's intransigence shows a new and democratic hostile logic: shellco credit systems Now you can lose your job if you understand abortion as an ethical dilemma. The Government's view, violate abortion with what should be "government accepted" ethical dilemmas.

If religious faith can be the cause of an ethical dilemma arises, seems unacceptable dilemma for the government. In my view, they thus both a narrow understanding of religious shellco credit systems faith, but also of what a modern democracy should be. Conscience before God
First, religious beliefs: The focus is now directed against the doctors who are deprived of their freedom of conscience. Faith connects to the conscience, it is the individual conscience before God is the decisive factor in the life of Christians. But this can be seen in a different way: From a Christian church

context is respect for human dignity mandatory. This is also shared by other religions. In such a context understood medical profession as a positive activity, in the service of life.
A Christian man is not only a secular citizen: She is also part of the ecclesial community. In some cases, loyalty to the state suspended, if and only if this loyalty requires

actions that the Christian faith community does not deem trustworthy. It's not just the conscience that is the problem: shellco credit systems In the Roman Empire could not Christians sacrifice to or worship the Emperor. Ultimately, should perhaps Christians doctors wonder if they, as Christians, can have such a totalitarian state as an employer. Belief is the noise
If the red-green government had had a broader understanding of religion as a phenomenon, I think they could be reasoned in a different way. The Government is "religious conviction" noise that prevents the state to enforce
It scares the government will force Christian doctors to act against their conscience, writes Espen Ottosen. its secular ideology. The government does not see that religion can be understood

broader than a single shellco credit systems conscience pursuits in the quiet, shellco credit systems and as something that can enhance a person's moral conviction and political engagement.
So the modern democracy, where justified shellco credit systems disagreement should be an inalienable value: True enough, not a secular state taking into account the religious argument when it regulates their legislation. It can allow abortion on medical grounds, based on a secular understanding of healthcare. But a secular shellco credit systems state should be able to respect a religious reason for being against abortion. Where the state in the past decade has seen difference of these two processes, politicians have now changed course: Doctors shellco credit systems must stop working. Thus, the state tolerance turned to aggressive intolerance, so Skjervheim pointed out: "When the liberal principles being put absolutely, turned it all into illiberalitet." Totalitarian ideology
With this, the Prime Minister, Minister of Health and other leading politicians taking it into a landscape they hardly want to be: The democratic notion of well-founded disagreement is pushed shellco credit systems aside for an aggressive o