Long Term Project
I’ve been asked to spread this around, and to see if anyone knows something like it, or if they would be able to (and like to) help. The project itself plans to start something which will last in the long-term. If you have any ideas, or would like to be involved, let me know. Right now, it is just in the initial stages.
A group of concerned lay Catholics anticipates future need for a model Statement of Conscientious Objection which is supported by a uniform, widely-reviewed, scholarly explanation of the Statement. Such a project would include, at a minimum, input from theologians and lawyers. The Statement, and supporting documentation, would establish an individual’s right and claim to refrain and desist from any practice required by employment or other affiliation which violates the individual’s religiously held belief in the sanctity of all life. Ideally, a registry of individuals who have signed the Statement to protect their job or affiliation against dismissal for refusal to participate in life-destructive procedures or practices could be created and maintained. Such a registry would also serve as a resource for expert witnesses, legal assistance and other professional support which individuals may need if the Statement is challenged.
We would like to know (1) whether you are aware of any other efforts in this vein and (2) your initial reaction to this proposal. We recognize this effort as a long-term project, and would like to create a core of interested people, nationally and internationally, to begin research and organization. We appreciate any contacts that you might provide.
Comments are closed.
I read this very short, interesting post on Mirror of Justice a few days ago:
It seems to me the statement of conscientious objection would be valuable if it reasonably and clearly defined what constitutes both participate in and life-destructive procedures or practices. We can all agree that doctors and nurses should have the right to refuse to participate in abortions. But does a hospital employee have a right to refuse to sterilize instruments used in abortions? Does a janitor have a right to refuse to mop the floor in an operating room used for abortions? (The Provider Conscience Regulation would have granted the right to refuse in those two cases.) What about an elevator operator refusing to stop at the floor where abortions are performed? What about someone working in the billing department who refused to handle invoices for procedures that troubled their consciences? And of course what about the “wholly unforeseeable claim” that the Mirror of Justice poster acknowledges would be possible (although, he believes, rare)?
I would say that voluntary sterilization is not life-destructive, and yet the law protects medical professionals who refuse to participate in it. I would assume that those who supported the Provider Conscience Regulation would consider a statement of conscience that limited itself to life-destructive procedures or practices too narrow. (I wouldn’t.)
As for a registry, wouldn’t having one’s name on it be the equivalent of wearing the yellow star the Mirror of Justice poster is concerned about?
Henry, I hate to burst your bubble, but the Anabaptists beat you to it. We have been keeping files for the young men in the denomination who conscientiously appose war. These files document the religious convictions regarding war and are maintained in case the draft is ever reinstated.
As for the previous comment about wearing a yellow star, such a statement is widely inappropriate. In the case of CO’s in WWI, yes they were imprisoned. Indeed some even died as a result. Yet, such a statement of conscience can lead to persecution, but linking it to the systematic killing of 6 million Jews is indeed vain.
Josh
Yes, there are examples like that which could be useful, but this should be something following along the lines of that, but would be more expansive, and broader in scope. How broad will be one of the questions examined. But if you have any advice as to where one could find the Anabaptist files and how they worked it out, it would help as well. As a format and an example. And do the files just tell of their stand, or do they also show where the Anabaptist can go for legal help (for example) in case they go to the courts?
It’s interesting to me that some things one would expect to be of great interest wind up getting so few comments.
Ha! Well said! Probably because a constructive response is never as exciting as venom ad infinitum!
Henry, I will have to look at what the documents require of CO’s. The frame of these files however have some precedent given that members of these denominations went before draft boards in WWII and Vietnam. Thus, they were aware of the questions what would be asked. When I get a hold of something I will post it here. For some reasons, I have the feeling the questions may not be all that different in the case of Abortion CO’s.
Now in terms of volume, I have some fustrated comments to make there, but I am avoiding arguing. I imagine, that if this is a serious undertaking, that the files ought to be stored and maintained in diocese facilities. This seems to be a kind of material participation in virtue the Church ought champion.
Okay, some basic research. First, there is a registry called The National Registry for Conscientious Objection. Their format is a short statement, which is signed and witnessed to by two others. It is then sent to a community which maintains the files. This seems helpful in terms of a short, 1 page, document to establish objection.
The more established, and probably more proactive community is the Central Committee for Conscientious Objection. Here is a link to their CO Claim:
http://www.objector.org/coclaim.html
enjoy