South Carolina House Approves Bill Allowing Doctors To Deny Care Based On Their Personal Religious Beliefs

So if a doctor doesn’t want to treat colored folk that would be OK.  What about the people with red hair because they are icky folk?   When does the right of quality healthcare take a back seat to bigotry?  Oh yes when it is Christians needed to discriminate so they demand the right to refuse to help / treat a patient in medical need.  God before helping the sick and caring for the needy, was that what old Jesus said?   See if they are of the right political party and follow your church doctrines before you give medical aid was a verse I never learned was in the bible.  

Changing America reports:

South Carolina lawmakers on Friday passed a bill allowing medical professionals and insurance companies to deny care based on personal belief. Some say the legislation, which now heads to the state Senate for consideration, would disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ people, women, and people of color.

Under the bill, titled the “Medical Ethics and Diversity Act,” South Carolina law would be altered to excuse medical practitioners, health care institutions and health care payers from providing care that violates their “conscience.”

Dozens of state residents in February testified against the bill, calling it vague and overbroad. They also shared concerns that the legislation would disproportionately impact marginalized communities.

From the Human Rights Campaign:

HB 4776 allows healthcare institutions to refuse to provide care, even when it is medically necessary and in the best interest of the patient. Under this legislation, healthcare institutions will be able to refuse to refer, teach, and research any items they deem to be against their beliefs.

These bills will impact access to gender-affirming care, contraceptives, HIV medications, fertility care, end of life care, and mental health services, as well as allow insurance companies and employers to refuse to reimburse, pay, or contract for medically necessary services.

Religious freedom is a fundamental American value that is entirely compatible with providing quality, non-discriminatory healthcare. It is not a license to deprive others of their rights simply because of personal beliefs.

This bill sends the message that those seeking medical care in conflict with their doctor’s non-medical values are not equal members of society entitled to dignity and respect.

4 thoughts on “South Carolina House Approves Bill Allowing Doctors To Deny Care Based On Their Personal Religious Beliefs

    1. Hello Randy. Yes leeches were quite the rage, and if you are not healthy enough to work for the lord of the manor then you don’t deserve a doctor anyway. Oh how far the US has fallen. Just listened to Beau’s take on the Republicans and their votes against capping the patients cost of insulin at $35. They want to cause as much hurt to the people as possible so the people will blame Biden for their pain. But even when they are in power the Republicans refuse to help the people or stop their pain. Sickening that bigotry and racism is allowed to take precedence over the welfare of the people in the US.


  1. A person isn’t a medical professional if he or she doesn’t follow professional standards. That is what determines the profession. Religious beliefs have no place at this grown up table. So meeting those standards – and not some personal version of them – determines the professionalism. Passing laws to exempt people from those standards as this legislation does – the religious aspect nor any other ideological belief doesn’t matter a tinker’s damn even though we know perfectly well this was the central issue to justify it – directly undermines those standards.

    Any medical professional ‘good’ with this legislation is exactly the kind of person who is undermining the role professional standards play in licensing. These confused members should have their licenses revoked for cause.

    You cannot be both professional licensed practitioner yet allow personal beliefs to shape your adherence to them… unless you want Leroy down the block working as a police offer to decide which laws based on his personal opinions he will or will not enforce, Rose-Marie up the street working as a judge to decide based on personal opinions which rulings will be accepted, Abdullah across the road deciding which parts of the curriculum he will teach based on personal preferences, Nhung over at the pharmacy deciding which prescriptions to fill based solely on personal opinion. Professional licensing does not give the practitioner the ethical right to go beyond or around or under the standards.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hello Tildeb. I agree. Unfortunately your last paragraph described what is happening in the US currently. These bills include the term conscience to try to avoid being called unconstitutional on the grounds of religion. But in the US the push by religious institutions to put their doctrines into the secular laws was greatly helped by tRump who filled the courts with religious ideologs and helped elect legislators in both state and federal that put their religion over secular laws. Do you know about project Blitz? I do not know if it is active in Canada, but it is a well funded organization that works to push religion into the state laws. They write hundreds of bills and pay local leaders to push them through their legislatures.

      Professional standards started to be eroded with anti-abortion anti-contraception bills in the US. Then they moved to trying to give the right to refuse to treat LGBTQ+ people. Now it has expanded to any treatment to any person, even life saving medical treatment is at the whim of the provider. The question has been asked does that include race and the author of the bill said yes.

      The question I have is what does the bill provide the ones promoting it. Clearly it is unconstitutional right now but that may change. But what do the Republicans get from pushing a bill that degrades equal medical treatment in the US. I think it is more than just religious dislike of some groups or even an attempt to stop some medical care. I think it about stopping the growing idea that medical care is a human right that the public deserves to have the government provide. It is trying to stop the idea that healthcare should be a universal or single payer system such as Canada has. I think it is about ensuring the huge profit that is in the healthcare system the US has stays in place. By allowing any medical provider or facility to refuse care for any reason removes it as a right the people could expect to have. It will further the move of the US to have a two tier system that gives care only to those who can afford it and denies it to the rest. That is the system that has been growing in the US. These bills would cement it in place.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.